Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Project overview Cannabis will be legal in Canada on October 17, 2018.
In Calgary, public consumption rules for cannabis will be similar to those for public consumption of alcohol. Under the Cannabis Consumption Bylaw, it will be illegal to consume cannabis in any form (smoking, vaping, or edibles) in public places, except for designated cannabis consumption areas. Cannabis may be consumed on private property.
Because landlord and tenant agreements, condo bylaws, and hotel rules can prohibit cannabis consumption in or on their properties, some citizens and visitors to Calgary may not have a legal place to consume cannabis. To that end, the Cannabis Consumption Bylaw allows Council to approve designated areas where cannabis may be smoked, vaped, or otherwise consumed in specific public places. These designated cannabis consumption areas are intended to help alleviate lack of access to a permissible place to consume cannabis once it is legal.
Ward Councillors or residents can begin the process to have designated cannabis consumption areas in their community. Interest was expressed in piloting some designated spaces in Ward 9, in the following locations:
1. Bridgeland: Murdoch Park, on the southern end of 7A St. N.E. 2. Inglewood I: Green space at 11 Ave. S.E., between 11th and 12th St 3. Inglewood II: Green space adjacent to Wildlands parking lot on Ninth Ave. S.E. past 22nd St. 4. Ogden: Green space located north of shopping plaza at Glenmore Tr. and Ogden Rd S.E.
Potential areas are carefully considered through criteria addressing the location’s accessibility, safety, and proximity to sensitive land uses such as schools, playgrounds, and residences. Each area will be confined to a defined radius and equipped with waste receptacles and tamper-proof ashtrays. Once the spaces are up and running, the City of Calgary may suspend locations should there be safety or nuisance concerns.
1/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Engagement overview Feedback on the proposed Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas was collected by two means:
• In-person: Sounding boards were set up at each of the proposed locations and included an overview of the project and proposed area, feedback forms and a submission box for completed feedback forms. • Online: There was a main landing page on The City’s Engage Portal for the project, as well as individual pages for each of the communities where the areas were proposed, which included the same questions as the in-person feedback forms.
Both online in-person engagement opportunities were open from August 27 to September 7, 2018. Sounding boards were located at all proposed areas during this time except for Inglewood, where the sounding board was located at the 11 Avenue S.E. location from August 27 to September 2, and at the Wildlands parking lot location from September 3 to 7, 2018.
What We Asked Stakeholders were asked the following questions regarding each of the proposed Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas:
1. How would this consumption area be of benefit to you? 2. Are there any issues we should consider with this proposed location? 3. Do you have any other questions or comments regarding the proposed location?
On the Engage Portal pages, we also asked for the first three digits of the respondents’ postal codes, to better understand which of the responses came from community residents, and which came from residents in other parts of the city.
What We Heard
The issue most often expressed by respondents was the potential of increased crime resulting from designated cannabis consumption areas. Respondents were concerned that public safety near designated areas may be at risk and said that security monitoring would be important to maintain a feeling of safety for community residents. Residual litter would be dangerous if left unmonitored.
Another concern voiced by many respondents was that designated cannabis consumption areas may negatively impact family-oriented communities, particularly those where children would likely be nearby. For all four proposed areas, respondents said that proximity to public infrastructure such as schools, playgrounds, churches and pathways were problematic, particularly in Bridgeland. Many respondents thought that the proposed Wildlands area in Inglewood was too close to the Inglewood Bird Sanctuary and
2/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 community residences. Concerns of isolated location and pre-existing illegal encampments were also high on the list.
Other issues expressed were exposure to second hand smoke, allergies, and asthma.
Respondents were generally not comfortable with the concentration of all four proposed designated cannabis areas in Ward 9 and wanted to know why those areas were selected. Some wanted more information on site selection criteria and felt inadequately consulted.
Some respondents suggested that cannabis should have the same public consumption regulations as tobacco, while others believe that rules for public consumption of cannabis should be the same as liquor. Respondents indicated cannabis should be consumed at home or in establishments like bars or lounges (*note: The City of Calgary does not have the ability to provide cannabis bars or lounges as such establishments would contravene the provincial Tobacco and Smoking Reduction Act. If cannabis cafes or lounges are allowed in the future, this would be a provincial decision).
Other issues expressed by respondents included increased potential for fires and concern whether the areas would be properly maintained. Many also indicated that the areas could increase the potential of cannabis-impaired driving for those who may have to drive to get to the area. They also commented that any designated cannabis consumption areas should be privately funded and not supported by taxpayer dollars.
We also received feedback from respondents who are in favour of the designated areas. Some respondents live in condos or rental units and would appreciate a nearby location at which they could consume cannabis. Respondents in favour said that a convenient designated area close to home would allow them to walk there and not have to drive.
3/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Respondents For or Against Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas 0
493 1116
3257
For Against Not Evident
4/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Concerns Surrounding the Proposed Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas
Crime & Safety
Children & Families
Standardized Regulations
Site Selection
Proximity to Public Infrastructure
Health/Nuisance Concerns
Proximity to School
Cafes/Lounges
Distance
Place for me to Consume
Stigmatizes Consumers
Property Values
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
For a detailed summary of the input that was provided, please see the Summary of Input section.
For a verbatim listing of all the input that was provided, please see the Verbatim Responses section.
Next steps
As a result of the significant percentage of respondents that expressed opposition, the initiating Councillor, Ward 9 Councillor Carra, withdrew the proposal on Sept. 12, 2018. The four proposed designated cannabis consumption areas did not proceed to a Public Hearing of Council where they would have been approved or rejected. Calgary will not have designated cannabis consumption areas upon legalization on Oct. 17, 2018.
5/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Summary of Input – Bridgeland (Murdoch Park, south end of 7A St. N.E.)
The following section includes key themes from the feedback collected both in-person and online.
Question 1: How would this consumption area be of benefit to you?
802 Comments Theme Detail Children/Families (79) Respondents indicated that Murdoch park is used by families and is a popular play area for children, and the adjacent pathway is frequently used to access the park. Respondents indicated they would avoid that section of the park if the proposed area is approved. Crime & Safety (70) Respondents indicated the proposed area would exacerbate existing illicit drug use and homeless encampment issues in the neighbourhood, and generally decrease safety and security in Bridgeland.
Respondents were also concerned that the proposed cannabis consumption area would cause an increase in drug trafficking, vandalism, theft and other crime in Bridgeland, indicating that crime has been getting worse in Bridgeland in recent years. Place for me to consume Some respondents indicated they lived in nearby condos where (36) smoking of cannabis is prohibited, and that the proposed location would be of benefit to them. In addition, respondents appreciated the proximity of the proposed area to shops and restaurants. Health Concerns / Nuisance Respondents were concerned about the potential for second hand (smoke and smell) (35) smoke, the smell of cannabis travelling over long distances, increased noise and smoke exacerbating allergies and conditions such as asthma. Proximity to Public Respondents were concerned that the proposed location was too Infrastructure (27) close to the playground in Murdoch Park, and indicated that people walk past the proposed area with their children to go to the park to play. (19)
Other concerns were the proximity to pathway (6) negatively impacting users; as well as proximity to the church (1). Standardized Regulations Respondents indicated cannabis should be consumed at home or in (26) establishments like bars or lounges. Respondents felt that it did not make sense to allow public consumption of cannabis, as public consumption of alcohol is illegal. Proximity to School (23) Respondents felt the proposed location was too close to Langevin School and indicated that the school uses this park for gym classes and other activities.
6/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Question 2: Are there any issues we should consider with this proposed location?
823 Comments
Theme Detail Children/Families (358) Children soccer, tobogganing, can’t stop underage users, used by Langevin School, near Children’s Cottage Society, daycares in surrounding area. Proximity to Public Respondents felt the proposed location was too close to the Infrastructure (256) playground and soccer field in Murdoch Park.
Pathway is a major entry point to key locations: c-train, park & playground, zoo, as well as high recreational usage by cyclists, runners, skateboarders, and families.
Church is also nearby.
Crime & Safety (207) Already a high crime rate in the area. Proximity to downtown and the DI Centre, theft, too many exit points, high transient population, social disorder increasing.
Impaired driving.
Concerns regarding who will be watching increased criminal activity (drug dealing, impaired driving, littering, loitering, etc…) and subsequent enforcement. Proximity to School (151) Respondents felt the proposed location was too close to Langevin School and indicated that the school regularly uses Murdoch Park for gym classes and other activities. Respondents shared that many children walk past the proposed location on their way to and from school. Health Concerns/Nuisance Second hand smoke, smell, smell travelling long distances, (smoke and smell) (88) allergies, littering of butts (existing problem with smokers), prevailing wind will carry odours to buildings, late night noise and partying. Health impacts to dogs, health impacts to seniors. Standardized Regulations (57) Respondents wanted the same regulations that apply to tobacco and liquor public consumption.
7/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Question 3: Do you have any other questions or comments regarding the proposed location?
658 Comments
Theme Detail Children/Families (123) Exposing children to second hand smoke; bad influence; easy access to drugs; family friendly activities. Crime & Safety (120) Strong focus on who would monitor the sites and safety of the neighbourhood. Standardized Regulations Respondents wanted the same regulations that apply to tobacco (106) (74) and liquor (32) public consumption. Site Selection (81) Majority of respondents (50) were concerned about the Ward 9 concentration followed by adherence to site selection criteria (17) and inadequate consultation. Cafes & Lounges (52) Preference is cannabis consumption is kept to private not public spaces. Health Concerns/Nuisance Exposure to second hand smoke, seniors’ facilities are nearby, (smoke and smell) (44) smoke cannot be contained to one spot. Proximity to Public Contravenes the 100 m from areas intensively used by children. Infrastructure (43) Proximity to School (18) Does not fit the 150 m from school requirement; students use area for physical education classes; impaired driving; more consultation; student walking routes
Summary of Input – Inglewood I (11 Ave. S.E., between 11 and 12 St.) The following section includes key themes from the feedback collected both in-person and online.
Question 1: How would this consumption area be of benefit to you? 382 Comments
Theme Detail Crime & Safety (23) Majority of respondents were concerned with impaired driving (12). Standardized Regulations Respondents wanted the same regulations that apply to public (19) consumption of tobacco (9) and liquor (10).
Place for Personal Close to home, walking distance would allow one to smoke pot and Consumption (18) not have to drive. Distance (17) Mixed responses – some felt the site was too far and they would have to drive to get there, while others liked the fact that they could walk. Site Selection (15) Respondents were concerned about the Ward 9 concentration (15) Children & Families (9) This site is not seen as beneficial to children and families and would create more damage than benefit.
8/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Question 2: Are there any issues we should consider with this proposed location?
383 Comments
Theme Detail Crime & Safety (120) The top concern cited was impaired driving (32) followed by safety (26) and monitoring (24). There were also concerns surrounding the mixed use of alcohol and cannabis (22). Standardized Regulations Respondents wanted the same regulations that apply to public (52) consumption of liquor (37) and tobacco (15). Site Selection (49) Concerns were highest on non-compliance to site selection criteria (33), followed by Ward 9 concentration (12) and inadequate consultation (4). Health / Nuisance (43) Concerns include allergies, asthma, breathing in second hand smoke, smell, and subsequent bad decision- making after consumption by users. Children & Families (29) Site will become unusable for families and children, lessen the enjoyment for current park users, will bring in less desirable crowd. Distance (14) Proposed locations are too far from other parts of the city. Perhaps put on the train line so more easily accessible. Stigmatizes Consumers This out of the way location isolates users. May make users feel (14) outed.
Question 3: Do you have any other questions or comments regarding the proposed location?
335 Comments
Theme Detail Standardized Regulations Respondents wanted the same regulations that apply to public (59) consumption of liquor (46) and tobacco (13). Crime & Safety (53) The top concern cited was monitoring (28) followed by impaired driving (11) and increase in crime (7). Site Selection (50) Respondents were primarily concerned about the Ward 9 concentration (40). Cafes & Lounges (20) Preference is cannabis consumption is kept to private not public spaces. Health / Nuisance (15) Concerns cited are exposure to second hand smoke, adverse effect on non-smokers, and the drifting smell. Children & Families (9) Respondents do not want their children to be exposed to drug use.
9/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Summary of Input – Inglewood II (Green space adjacent to Wildlands parking lot on Ninth Ave. S.E. past 22 St.)
The following section includes key themes from the feedback collected both in-person and online.
Question 1: How would this consumption area be of benefit to you? (321 Comments)
Theme Detail Site Selection (62) Concerns with site selection focussed on the distance of the area from public modes of transportation, condos and hotels (places where consumption is not permitted, and location is too close to neighbourhood residences. Many felt there was inadequate consultation and expressed concerns about the Ward 9 concentration. Crime & Safety (26) Respondents saw no benefit but rather a degradation of community through increased safety concerns, lack of monitoring, crime and the potential for impaired driving. Place for me to consume Some felt that this was a great location (along the Bow River (very (25) scenic) and would help remove the stigma attached to legal drug use, and was within walking distance of where they lived. Proximity to Public In this initial question, proximity to the pathway, schools, and bird Infrastructure (13) sanctuary were all concerns. Side themes noted were families who use these amenities as well as the inability to control cannabis smoke. Standardized Regulations As in previously mentioned feedback, many thought that the (13) designated cannabis consumption areas should be standardized and treated like liquor and tobacco. Preference over private use to public consumption. Children & Families (9) Many small children in proximity to the area who should not be exposed to the consumption areas. This is seen as a community neighbourhood, these areas will not improve the environment.
10/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Question 2: Are there any issues we should consider with this proposed location?
(321 Comments)
Theme Detail Crime & Safety (179) The top concerns cited were safety (51), impaired driving (44) and monitoring (29). Respondents worried about the pre-existing illegal encampments, as well as the potential fire hazard with the Wildlands. Site Selection (109) Concerns were highest on impact to the community (51) and its residences. It has taken years of work to remove the negative image and they feel this will only reinstate it. The next was the distance people would have to travel to the site (related to above comment of impaired driving) (45), followed by the Ward 9 concentration (9). Proximity to Public Top concern was proximity to the Inglewood Bird Sanctuary (37), Infrastructure (104) followed by the schools (29), and the pathway (20). Reason cited were inability to control the smoke, litter, imagery and the negative impact it has to humans, pets and wildlife. Standardized Regulations Respondents wanted the same regulations that apply to public (51) consumption of liquor (37) and tobacco (15), and it should not be consumed in public areas. Children & Families (57) Family area not conducive to cannabis consumption. Increased drug use results in decreased family use. It sends a mixed messaging to children who have been educated not to smoke. Park is for recreational users not pot smokers.
Question 3: Do you have any other questions or comments regarding the proposed location?
(274 Comments)
Theme Detail Site Selection (138) Concerns centred around adherence to the site selection criteria (50) with the comment that bylaws state that “activity on public land should not be allowed to infringe on the enjoyment of the land […].” Also mentioned was that ownership of the land did not fall under the City. Distance from users and isolated location (29) were problematic as well as negative impact to the community (32) overall. Standardized Regulations Respondents wanted the same regulations that apply to public (76) consumption of liquor (35) and tobacco (12). It was strongly felt that cannabis consumption is best served in private venues and not public facing areas.
11/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Crime & Safety (61) The top concern cited was onitoring (20) followed by impaired driving (11) and safety, crime and fire hazard coming in combined at (30). Also increased traffic concerns. Children & Families (25) Respondents did not want children exposed to the smoke or the associated activities. Children and families should take precedent over cannabis consumption. Too many children frequent this area. A family neighbourhood. Proximity to Public The top concern was proximity to the Inglewood Bird Sanctuary Infrastructure (24) and the Wildlands area (19) as well as proximity to the schools (and use of area for educational programming) (10) and the pathway (cyclists, dog walkers and families) (4).
Summary of Input – Ogden
The following section includes the top 6 key themes from the feedback collected both in-person and online.
Question 1: How would this consumption area be of benefit to you? 253 Comments
Theme Detail Distance (20) Respondents felt that although the site would be convenient for those that can walk to it, for others that have to drive or take transit, it was too far. Crime & Safety (15) Top concerns included impaired driving (6) followed by safety (3), monitoring (3), and crime (3). Children & Families (9) A park where children can see it is not acceptable. People who live next to the park with children or grandchildren threaten to move. It would make their backyards unusable. Health / Nuisance (smoke A decrease in air quality. Health concerns include asthma, and and smell) (8) nausea. Standardized Regulations Respondents wanted the same regulations that apply to public (8) consumption of liquor (6) and tobacco (2). Cafes & Lounges (6) Public consumption should be in a bar. Site Selection (6) The top concern was the Ward 9 concentration.
Question 2: Are there any issues we should consider with this proposed location?
260 Comments
Theme Detail
12/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Crime & Safety (97) Top concerns included impaired driving (38) followed by safety (28), and crime (18). Children & Families (37) Location is near a sledding hill. Ogden is a becoming a family neighbourhood. Play site for children and sports. Site Selection (29) Respondents cited that the top concerns were non-compliance with site selection criteria (22) followed by Ward 9 concentration (7). People wanted more information than they had been given. Standardized Regulations Respondents wanted the same regulations that apply to public (8) consumption of liquor (4) and tobacco (4). Distance (8) Concerns around amenities for those who travel to the site. Access for those who don’t live in the neighbourhood. It’s in the middle of nowhere. Property Values (6) Concerns that property values will be negatively affected.
Question 3: Do you have any other questions or comments regarding the proposed location?
230 Comments
Theme Detail Crime & Safety (48) Top concerns included safety (19), followed by monitoring (8), and crime (10). Impaired driving was also cited (8). Site Selection (32) Respondents cited that the top concerns were non-compliance with site selection criteria (23) followed by Ward 9 concentration (6), and inadequate consultation (3). Children & Families (10) Don’t target our youth. Keep it places where youth cannot access – such as bars. Health / Nuisance (smoke It will stink up the area. Second hand smoke. and smell) (9) Distance (6) Too far for people to drive to. Property Values (3) Concerns that property values will be negatively affected.
13/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Verbatim Comments
Verbatim comments presented here include all of the suggestions, comments, and messages that were collected on-line and in-person.
Offensive words and personally identifying information have been removed and replaced with either [offensive language removed}, [removed], or [personal information removed]; otherwise comments here are completely un-edited.
Bridgeland (Murdoch Park, on the southern end of 7A St. N.E.)
1. How would this consumption area be of benefit to you?
I am a smoker and cannot smoke within my home, I currently have a liscence to smoke and find it hard to be able to anywhere, this would benefit me because I cannot smoke unless there is somewhere that I can, I think this would be beneficial to a lot. It wouldn't! Why are there consumption areas being proposed in the first place? This area is in a good location, not too close to residences and in a park setting. It is of no benefit to me. it would not benefit me, I live in Renfrew and consider Bridgeland my preferred place to go for shopping, lunch, other services, it serves as a cultural/community centre for me. I realize cannabis is necessary for some and think an indoor lounge is best. Not at all None. stop use of cannabis No it will be a nice place to end up at while smoking my cannibis joint to get there. It has no benefit to me. I don't think that this is an appropriate area in Bridgeland, since it's so close to residences and parks that are used often. Would not It would not. My son is 3 years old and we bike on that path everyday. It wouldn’t. Our community has a problem with homelessness due to our proximity to downtown and the shelters there. This will exacerbate the issue because it will invite more people without a connection to the community to hang out here. There would be no benefit to me.
14/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It would not be Consumers have had so many rights taken away at this point a hand out like this is laughable. However it still would be well recieved It wouldn’t None It would not be of benefit to have a consumption site there! We already have enough issues with theft and vandalism why on earth would we add to this debacle! Get the community safe before adding in more complications. It wouldn't It would not be of benefit. It would deter me and my young kids from playing at the park. We live on 7A street and often walk past there to get to the playground I rent in the area and smoke cannabis Bridgeland already has the highest Crime rate in Calgary, this would just add to the huge existibg problem. Foes the City have Police officers to spare for increased crime? I think Not! Zero benefit It wouldn’t Absolutely Not! Regardless of the site, to my knowledge, the City does not provide tobacco consumption sites, so why is the City wanting to provide cannabis consumption sites, and beside or at a park?!?! It would not benefit me; it would negatively impact me as I walk there and wouldn't want to walk through that smoke. This area would be of zero benefit to me. I have small children and we live on McDougall Road and use this area on weekly basis to access the playground, soccer field, 1st Avenue NE, etc. It would be very concerning to have a designated area there. No - this would be a major problem for me and my family. This area is heavily used by families for tobogganing, school kids have gym class here, the Langevin Mile is a run the school kids do weekly on this path. This puts my kids at risk to get pot it would not. It would not be! It would not be of benefit. I think pot consumption should be like alcohol where it is done inside your home or designated establishments that are geared towards pot consumption.
Absolutely NO benefit. This would be an even greater opportunity for increased Crime and B/E in our area. Our Property Values would decrease ( there are numerous condos ). BRCA is trying to beautify and make the community Safer. Why would you penalize us This would not be of benefit to me It wouldn't be
15/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
There needs to be a designated space for folks to consume without fear of punishment. Renters are especially hooped. It wouldn't No benefit It would be of no benefit to our community - this spot is already an area of concern for issues of safety, homeless encampments, a known site for illegal drug users- opening this location as a pot spot would only serve to invite more of the same As a medicinal cannabis patient it will be pleasant to be able to take a walk and consume cannabis without it being a problem. No it would not be a benefit to me or the area It is already a problem area and this will add to it It would not be of benefot to me. yes This location is close to my house None. I don’t believe it will. No way what so ever. It would not. Public consumption sites are the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard of and a huge waste of money. I've been smoking for many years and the last thing I or any friends of mine will do is visit a site like this in any location. Who are these for? teens? N/A This area has absolutely NO benefit to me. No benefit. This would be of absolutely NO benefit to me. I already feel unsafe in that area due to the amount of people hanging around the Edm Trail bridge right into my community that are drunk and high. I cannot walk home safely from downtown after 7:00, nor Ctra increase small businesses profit . train is near by to. people dont need to drive It would not benefit me. I live in bridgeland and am not benefiting from it but believe there should be areas located in each community Closest to me. Not me personally. It wouldn't yes, its a good start... but people aren't going to go to a specific part of the city to smoke. it should be treated like tobacco... we're not inventing this, people already smoke all over this city so this is actually more restrictive No, I rather it not be in my neighbourhood
16/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Provide a safe space to consume that is close to the c-train It would not be a benefit to anyone in the community. This is too close to a community center where children come and an off leash dog park. It would be of no benefit to me as I disagree with the upcoming legalization. it would not it is a bad thing. It wouldn’t this is a terrible site. NOT AT ALL. Shouldn’t happen outdoors. It would not Not one single bit It would not, it will only cause more issues for Bridgeland. We have enough issues with the drop in centre clientele and it is about time other neighbourhoods take on this type of behavior.
It may encourage other residents in my condo building to smoke outdoors rather than in our building. There is no benefit That would be a public place nearby my residence and downtown that allows me to consume my cannabis. That offers me an option in case i move to a rental property where it does not allow smoking. not a benefit. the smell is too strong to be consumed in open areas. I'd prefer cannabis consumption be regulated similar to cigarettes, so I'm a fan of wider outdoor public use in general. Thai may not be the best use of taxpayer money but it's at least a step in the direction for wider use. No It would not be of benefit. It wouldn't. It wouldn’t I live nearby, so if I wanted to consume outside of my own home, this would be convenient. It gives people equal opportunities to medicate or use Cannabis. O believe that the city should allow indoor commercial shops similar to pubs bars that allow alcohol. Or hooka bars.
It will make it unsafe for me to use that park and its facilities There is absolutely no benefit to me it would not No benefit to me. Not at all. I would not be of benefit to me. It would be the opposite. It doesn't. I don't smoke.
17/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
No the opposite. This would be a huge negative impact on use and enjoyment of public space. This is a detriment to my community This location is accessible It would not as I do not partake, however I think these sites are a good idea. I can't think of any way this would benefit me or my community. It would not benefit me directly but I think the area could use a little more pedestrian traffic to keep the crackheads away This area would not be of benefit to me. I go for walks/runs in this area and would prefer to inhale clean air and away from people who are high on drugs. Why is this ok but drinking in public is not ok? You would still be under the influence. It would not benefit me. This is a high-use area for Langevin students both in and out of class. Grades 7-9 hang out in this area to eat lunch. Gym classes use this area year-round. This is a very poor place for a consumption area. No benefit Absolutely no benefit to me or the neighborhood. I’ve smoked cannabis here in the past , I think the more areas the better and this particular area is already used by cannabis users and is tucked away but also safe and not too isolated. I like that is is near businesses / restaurants/ shops Please don’t make this location legal, you’ll kill this nice neighbourhood It doesn't. If my condo does not allow for consumption in the building this site is quite literally a 1 Minute walk from my home. As well the majority of my friends live in the same area and will be a great place to meet up. Plus we can use the park after! It is no benefit to me as a new condo resident in Riverside. We have an illegal drug trafficing/using problem here around the LRT Stn. The cannabis use site will exacerbate the existing problems. It would not. I don't smoke. I don't want to promote smoking anything in my neighbourhood.
I think this is a great spot to have a cannabis consumption site, it's further away from the main area of the park and away from pathways that most people frequent, but still always space for users to go if they need. None. It is near the downtown and my work. It wouldn't. Calgary probably needs 100+ public consumption sites, not just 4. As of July 31st, there was 261 cannabis store applications submitted to the City of Calgary. If the City does not provide the areas, the bylaw will likely be ignored. It won't. This might be one of the worst locations you could have chosen. not at all
18/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It would not. It would hinder my exercise regime. This would not benefit me. It would not. I support legal consumption but smoking and public alchohol consumption bylaws exist for health and order reasons, and I see no reason cannabis shoyld frame differently. This area would not be of benefit to me. NONE! We already are a high crime neighbourhood! Very central in bridgeland and a convenient space with easy access. It wouldn’t. No No benefit, other than it would keep the smell of cannabis concentrated in a single area. I am a landlord of a condo complex nearby Murdoch Park. I feel this area would be a negative impact. It would not be No benefit would occur ill be smoking where cig smokers smoke thanks It would be of no benefit. It is of harm to the community. It attracts nothing but bad to the area. We could not go for a walk in the area or take my grandchildren there because of the smell and the stoners hanging around. No benefit. I have taken my coffee and sat in this park, read a book, watched soccer, enjoyed the park. There is no benefit to have a mixed use park now be taken over by people being allowed to smoke in the park. There are many children here, too. this would not benefit me and i don't think it would benefit the area residents or businesses this wouldnt benefit me in anyway as i dont go to this area of the city at all. None No benefit It seems like a nice spot to use recreational cannabis outdoors. It's near my condo unit which is important if condo bylaws prevent me from using indoors. I live in the area. Absolutely no benefit. no benefit to anyone that doesnt smoke to get high This would give residents with no other option to have a nice place to go with out felling like a criminal. It would not benefit nor detract from me My building in Crescent Heights prohibits smoking of any kind indoors. Having access to a legally designated green space nearby that I can travel to would mitigate potential conflicts and alleviate the anxiety of having to consume it illegally.
19/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It would not. I used to live in Bridgeland and have friends I visit with often in the area. Some of my favourite restaurants are in the area and this is a convienent location close to transit. It won't since I don't like in a condo or apartment. this is terrible! I am extremely allergic to pot and I run along this path regularly because of the high visibility and safety this location offers. To have to pass by this could lead to a severe/deadly reaction. Additionally, TONS of children walk here! It would not be a benefit to me, in fact, I would be quite upset if this proposed site was approved. I hate to be that person, but quite literally I don't want this in my backyard. It will not benefit me, nor my family, including my child NONE It wouldn’t. This does NOT benefit anyone! It would not benefit me It wouldn't! There is no benefit to utilizing public spaces for drug use It would not. I will consume at home There is no benefit to me I see no benefit to myself or my family It wouldn’t. absolutely no benefit to me or the neighbourhood. It is a horrid idea and will bring additional issues to the bridgeland/riverside neighbourhood It won't. It would not not beneficial, completely against it. I will move even though I absolutely love my home and neighbourhood. This would not benefit me at all Close by and a very enjoyable area to spend time Many school children use this area so selection of this location would be detrimental to the community. Not at all I live in the neighbourhood, and it would negatively impact me and families in the area. I believe cannabis use should be restricted to private homes or licensed premises, like alcohol. No It wouldn’t It wouldn’t.
20/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
If smokers are willing to use the space, yes. Yes It doesn't. No benefit - it is a central area of our neighbourhood, I do not want to be walking with my dog and children around that of no benefit It isn’t. While I support legalization, I do not support any consumption sites. Not at all. I chose this site to comment on as I couldn't comment on the whole concept in general. Am I supposed to drive there? What about medical? Not only this area will not be of any benefit to me, it will be a great detriment to me and a neighborhood. No. This site wouldn’t suit anybody. This consumption area has zero benefit to me or the community. It is a public park that would no longer be able to be enjoyed or used by my family. This designation is a detriment to an otherwise wonderful community. It can’t be used for this purpose. This area would not be of benefit to my family. We have young children and do not want them to be exposed to cannabis consumption. It would hopefully contain cannabis smoking to a certain area as opposed to the whole neighbourhood. The fact is, people who can’t smoke in their homes, appartements, and condos, will smoke in the neighbourhood either way as they have no where else to. No benefit to me would allow me to legally consume cannabis as a renter This proposed site would be of no benefit to me, I highly oppose the idea of consumption sites, especially this location. This is a park and walkway that I enjoy on a daily basis, and I do not want to be exposed to the smell of marijuana. I WOULD HAVE A PLACE TO GO OTHER THAN MY HOUSE. What a stupid 'liberal' idea. Do you have public consumption sites where you can bring alcohol ? No. So why the need for this ? It won’t It wouldn’t. This location is 45 minutes away via transit from my apartment. Not worth spending 1.5 hours travel to partake in something legal. my landlord and condo do not allow the consumption of cannabis on site, this will provide me with a location to legaly consume cannabis It won’t. I plan to light up responsibly just about anywhere someone might have a cigarette. I won’t be traveling for a designated green space to do so. Absolutely no benefit No benefit. Unwanted. Undesirable. It wouldn’t. I live in Sunnyside.
21/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It would be of absolutely NO benefit to me, to my neighbors and certainly not to the families in the area that use the park space for their activities. What kind of an opening question is this? I think it benefit cannabis users. I am not one but I support legalization because prohibition does not work. Not at all no benefit at all, Murdoch Park is family oriented park with lots of children playing in it. I think it benefit cannabis users. I am not one but I support legalization because prohibition does not work. no benefit at all, Murdoch Park is family oriented park with lots of children playing in it. It wouldn’t None It’s not. I do not smoke marajuana. No benefit at all it would not. I own property in this area and do not wish for this to be here. Absolutely not; it's a terrible idea. There is NO BENEFIT none and have more pollution to people health There is NO BENEFIT It would not. I live on a condo on Centre Avenue facing Murdoch Park and expect a consumption area will lead to more noise and more crime. NONE. THIS IS A NUISANCE FOR ANYBODY AROUND None This site would be of no benefit to me. It would impact me negatively. I do not want to have to have consumption of Cannabis in public spaces. I think that it would negatively impact my life.
Not at all I see no benefit to this area for families and residents. It would have no benefit and I disagree with this location no It would not be. Public consumption should be prohibited. Zero benefit. It would not. We have a lot of issues with drug addicts in the neighbourhood. We have a higher crime rate now than we have had in a longtime. We are dealing with needles in our parks, yards, and allies. Please stop this initiative for Bridgeland. It will not benefit me or my family in any way. Please disallow this congregation in one area. Not at all
22/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
This consumption area would not benefit me. no benefit It wouldn't I support an individual's legal right to use cannabis, but I see NO benefits to me or my family for this proposed consumption site location. It wouldn't. I'm extremely opposed. So many street people hanging around there loitering already being up to no good. I am open minded but this is not right It wouldn't necessarily benefit me as i don't live in the area but i 100% support this idea of a consumption site It wouldn’t be beneficial for me. No direct benefit for me, but I think it's important to have for condo residents This wouldn't be of any use to me or my family. This would not benefit me. It would negatively impact parking in the area, which is already at a premium It would not . We could do better then this for our citizens. it wouldn't. It would negatively impact my ability to take my nieces/nephews to the park on the pathway to play as I don't want them exposed to this. It provides an area available to all legal age citizens, regardless of Condo bylaws or home ownership. I think it is a good idea to make safe spaces accessable to citizens. I live in the neighbourhood and see no benefit. I walk with my child on the waking path and feel this would take away from a daily routine. It would not. I would have to avoid that area of the park with my young children who like to run, stroll and slide in the area. Well lit, open space in a convenient location for me. It wouldn't It would not in any way benefit me There is NO benefit to me. I take my nephews here to play and toboggan. I walk my dog there. It’s a high traffic area for the community. It would not be I don’t feel that it would ZERO - this absolutely will not benefit me or my family in any way. I cannot not understand how this site within 1 block of an elementary school, a place of worship, children's park and with a Police challenge drug area is even possible. BAD IDEA It would not benefit us at all nor our kids who attend the Langevin school two streets over and use this field daily for gym class, field studies and special events. It would not. I would have to avoid that area of the park with my young children who like to run, stroll and slide in the area.
23/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Not on this site It would not. None No It would not be a benefit to the community at all what so ever. Absolutely no benefit. I’m dumbfounded that it has been proposed in an area that is frequented by families with children. It would not be. It is the closest to my apartment, but still far as I am in the NW. N/A I would use it and hope others would use it too I can’t imagine it would be No and it would be a great disservice to us as we have young children. Not It would provide me with an opportunity to legally consume cannabis while out and about in my neighborhood. Otherwise I would end up doing it while walking down the streets or in parks while I thought no one was looking. It wouldn't. It would not. It's too small, we should create a district where this is okay Love the safe space. No benefits for me at all. I live in a condo , right across from the proposed area, and I am a cannabis user. As I cannot smoke cannabis inside, I would LOVE this space! In no way. I wouldn't. It would be the opposite of beneficial. I walk by there every day to pick up my kids from daycare. This path is th only stroller safe path from 7A down to McDougall road. Of this happens my kids and I will have to make a huge detour twice every day I don’t believe this area would benefit me in any way shape or form and I personally think that you are just asking for trouble by attempting to implement this in a neighbourhood where people have worked very hard to restore. I see no benefit, if I am not allowed to have a glass a wine or beer there why would someone be allowed to smoke cannibas there? Why isn't it legal everywhere? Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal everywhere. It wouldn’t
24/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It won't be. I believe it is not a good location. There is already a problem in this area with discarded needles, camps etc and this will add to the problem. Absolutely not! It would result in safety and nuisance issues in a neighbourhood already struggling with such issues. It would not be of any benefit to me. This consumption area would absolutely NOT be of benefit to me. It would be a determent to our community. If people would like to smoke in public, I would love to see adult lounges, buildings for this, not public family areas...same as alchohol. There is no benefit to segrating users of a legal substance to 4 sites. Similar to 4 bars in the city this will be centralized chaos. It would be useless to me It would be zero benefit to me. I am not against pot smoking but having an public consumption zone so close to the community centre where kids play on the playground is a bad idea. It won’t. It WOULD NOT benefit me or residence None It wouldn’t. It would be a detriment. It may lead to gentrification. however, not at a price i would like to pay. No benefit It would not It doesnt, None of the areas do. I will continue to smoke weed wherever I want. All the areas are too far away such that it would force me to drive intoxicated , as I live too far away to leave my vehicle and return at a later time. I can't think of a single benefit no. This is a ridiculous spot for this (although I don't think this should be in public at all). It's most central. It would not be of benefit to anyone This would be of no benefit whatsoever. It would not It won’t This would not benefit me at all. This park and area specially attracts vagrants It wouldnt It would not. No benefit zero benefit. There are already homeless problems in the area. It would ruin any chance of my enjoyment in that area. It is iff no benefit
25/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It would not benefit me. It is way too far away from where I live and work. These sites do not look safe or welcoming at all. No, there is a school 3 blocks away, do children need to walk by marijuana users and receive second hand smoke from users on their way to and from school No benefit, actually most frustrating that our public officials are allocating resources to this matter. I would like to be able to buy a bottle of wine, consume it responsibility in a park as a picnic. Why the need for these parks. It would not It would not be a benefit to anyone living close to this park this site is a terrible idea...it is heavily used by children and others (myself included) I avoid second hand smoke as I have a lung condition, smoke is smoke and I believe given that it is outside, the wind can blow that smoke anywhere Can I drink alchohol there too? How is this different tha. Going to a liquor store and having to take my alcohol home to drink??? Not in any way This has no benefit to our society no benefit at all, the opposite in fact This area would not be of benefit to me or the community I don't live or work in that community. It would not be of benefit to me It would not benefit me in any way whatsoever. No benefit whatsoever. Cannabis should be treated like alcohol. I do NOT want an area littered with butts and smoke and encouraging more transients in Bridgeland than already here. BAD idea, can't believe you proposed it, no vote for you next election! The risk to my family. We have a school just 2 blocks west. It ridiculous!!! It is within walking distance and close to transit and c-train no benefit Not in any way. Not at all. This is not a suitable area for cannabis consumption. This park is used daily and through the evening by families with their children. During the day schools and daycare will use this site for outdoor activities or soccer practice. It would not. It allows a place outstide where people can meet and enjoy the consumption of cannabis. I also agree with providing a safe, clean space to consume cannabis for those not able to smoke it in there homes.
26/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I'm not a smoker, but I am very pro-legalization. Obvisously then, this area will not benefit me personally, but I do believe that my opinion should still count. This is a leading question, to which the only answer for most is that it will not. It would not. I can consume at home, as can everyone else. If your landlord doesn't allow it - move. This is not a social issue. hurtful , no benefit As a resident of Bridgeland who uses this park with my family, this would not benefit us. This area wound NOT be of benefit. I do not smoke, nor want this near my place of residence. We do not want smoke and smokers in the area where we live. It will not be of benefit, it will be harmful to the neighborhood. We already have far too many transients wandering through, this will only encourage it. The STENCH of cannabis carries so far. Neighbor a few doors down smokes it, it is disgusting. It wouldn’t, it’s a horrible plan No benefit whatsoever I'm a recreational drug user and deal most of my business out of my home in a nearby condo. this new location would be a much safer place for me to conduct my business as well as be partially obscured from the field. NO benefit Central location, proximity to c-train truthfully, people should be able to smoke everywhere you are permitted to smoke cigarettes. I do not feel a designated park for cannabis is necessary at all! All it does is single out people and gives the illusion that you are doing something illegal! not at all. it would be a burden It will not benefit me. Close to my work. great location i love it. NO BENEFIT AT ALL !!! This consumption area SHOULD NOT be allowed - it is too close to schools/playgrounds/taboggan hill and a known hang out for drug use/vandalism/theft/homeless vagrants. I DO NOT support this! it won't. It is in a park used almost daily by Langevin school (science school) and it is where children toboggan daily in winter so they would be inhaling pot, especially after climbing up the hill. It is also right at a walking and cycling path. It would not be no benefit It’ll provide comedy, knowing I can watch hipsters and addicts fight for space It won't No benefit. Just no objections
27/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It would not benefit myself, or my family. I don't have any benefit with the this area at all, in fact affect my recreational areas. I don’t consume personally so it wouldn’t have an effect on me. But I do think having increased attendance at that park and in the community it would help deter crime and theft No not at all I just bought in this area 1 year ago and would not have thought the park was a positive if it was a delegated cannabis smoking areas it wouldn't. I need a consumption point but all of the proposed are too far. Am I expected to drive to and from intoxicated? because I highly disagree with driving under the influence Nice park, away from people/playground, could be made into a nice spot to sit and enjoy the view/park Increased diversity and inclusion in the neighborhood Zero benefit No benefits for myself It would not It would not It wouldn’t This has absolutely NO benefits to all the existing neighborhood and all the new residents who are planning to live in Bridgeland The proposed area for this activity is both inappropriate and detrimental to the neighborhood. Having people publically intoxicating themselves with a substance will negatively impact the security of local residents while degrading the family atmosphere. No it provides zero benefit, though I owe my home It would not be of benefit to me or my family, and we have concerns with that location due to proximity to park and school. It could help to prevent residents in my condo building from smoking inside units or on their balconies. Smoking inside results in common hallways smelling like smoke, and smoking on balconies leads to smoke drifting into neighbouring open windows. This area does not benefit anyone as a consumption area as this will lead to issues related to policing and social issues. Concern with over crowding and related issues. Issues with secondhand smoke will be a concern to residents and safety in general. What benefit? That's all low earner people need in Calgary, a drug pushing site set up in these areas. What a dumb question to ask in this survey. It would not be of any benefit to me. In fact it would be a great detriment to our community. Yes I live locally and it makes sense to have a consumption area near an area with bars, restaurants and condos. no benefit
28/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
None of them will, I need something in Deep South Calgary. Zero benefit. Not. What does that do for the people in the NW, or SW...? How about small sites peppered all over the city? Like pot lounges or bars. All locations not accessible enough....There should be indoor spaces. We may be renters but we aren't homeless... It doesn't benefit me personally, except through giving Calgarians and tourists a legal location to consume cannabis, which will bring in tax dollars (in theory). not at all....will never use it, think the idea is terrible. It wouldn’t benefit me at all but it’s a good trial space for public cannabis consumption. Provides a space for people to engage, similar to a bar or restaurant. I do not personally consume but I believe there should be central, easy to access locations for others to legally consume cannabis. It would not benefit me or my family. It would not benefit me in the slightest none - this is a family playground - it is illegal to smoke in public places - so why are you allowing it - and why do you think a concentrated dense amount of pot and smoke is a good thing. Perhaps the question is how would it NOT benefit you There would be no benefit to me or my family. It is not a benefit to the neighbourhood, it would be a determent to the area. It would not benefit me our the voting public No benefit Not benefits at all. It doesn't necessarily benefit me, but I support this selection. It would not benefit me at all. It is in close proximity to my condo so I may occasionally go there. This park is quite under utilized so it would be nice to see people using it. It wouldn’t. Not No benefits No benefit to me. It could potentially cause more issues. It would not None no It would not This consumption area would be of no benefit to me or the community. No benefit It won't, really stupid idew
29/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I live in a condo in the area. This would be the only space I can consume cannabis when it becomes legal. This would not be of any benefit to me or my family. It wouldn't be of benefit to me. It wouldn't. It is too far away from my residence and work to be of any benefit. We feel this outdoor consumption area would not be a benefit to us or our community as a whole. We disagree with outdoor consumption sites. It wouldn't benefit me or this community It wouldn't be beneficial to me. In fact, it would represent the hypocrisy of the government. Those that smoke cigarettes are not permitted to smoke within certain distances of buildings, it is a crime to drink alcohol in public so why the special tre None no None It would not. This is an area that is frequented by children. This is not a good location. This would not be of any benefit to me. No benefits to having a public consumption area. There are no public consumption areas for liquor. Cannabis is no different from liquor. None Well lit area, near Starbucks and other amenities. Easy to get to and not near a high traffic area
It would not benefit me No positive benefit. Do not support. It would not because I don’t plan on â˜consuming’. no benefit at all, see it as a negative for the neighbourhood. Definately won't be a benefit to [personal information removed] next election No benefit It would not benefit me at all Not at all. Very poor choice of location and a detriment to our community. It would not. Not at all. This is too close to playgrounds. Pot consumption should be near actual government buildings in communities and open streets that do not belong to anyone, not confined to a few neighbourhoods. This neither benefit users nor non-users. It wouldn't. Not at all. There is no be benefit. It's a terrible idea. People can gather and smoke on their own private property.
30/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It's convenient. It won't. It will be a complete nuisance. It doesn't. No benefit. no benefit to me Not at all. 100% opposed. It wouldn't It would not be of use to me. I do not consume cannabis products. This would not benefit our community at all!! The crime is already increasing. Very disappointed in having this in our community It wouldn't. I realize that there is a deisre to accommodate consumers of marijuana however it is of no benefit to me. There is no benefit to this consumption area. Other than have cannabis consumed on a pathway entrance to a park where Langevin school students go for Phys Ed. I am quite concerned of the opposite - the harm having a cannabis consumption area next to a children's tobogganing hill and where youth do gym classes is dangerous. My condo building bylaws will prohibit consumption, so I would love to have a space to go with my friends if we ever wanted to. It wouldn't be fair for condo-dwellers and renters to be completely prohibited from engaging in a legal recreational activity.
None There would be zero benefit to me personally. Not at all. Zero benefit to our neighborhood - their are proven reasons why smoking has been limited and why we have laws the do not allow for alcohol in 'consumption sites'.
Not looking for somewhere to smoke anything Zero and to everyone except to the sh!theads it will attract to the area. It will be a detriment to the entire area and the neighboroods around. It should not be consumed in public, weed should be treated the same as alcohol, this is a moronic idea
No Benefit None unless I’m selling harder drugs like meth, cocaine or Fentynol It won’t. I have no need for people to hang out and smoke weed or whatever in the neighbourhood. Why can’t they just smoke it anywhere.., sounds like you want to treat it like a cigarette.. should be illegal everywhere in public for consumption It would not be a benefit to me or the community at large.
31/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Murdoch park is one of the most peaceful parts of Bridgeland and one of the reasons I bought my home in the area. As it stands, there are considerable issues with trash and cigarette butts littering the walking paths. There is no foreseeable benefit to creating a cannabis consumption site here. This particular area would neither benefit nor hurt me personally. I am concerned that by having so few designated areas, you may inadvertently create large crowds or party spots, changing the neighborhood a lot. You may also create the need to travel all the way to these locations to consume.
It would not be of benefit to me It wouldn't be. I will be moving to Bridgleland in 6 months close to the proposed area and currently spend a lot of time there including the park around the consumption area. I don’t see a benefit to designating the area for cannabis consumption. It would be if no benifit! It is a total violation of my rights as a non smoker! I keep dont compromise others right to fresh air when outside and I expect the same human rights in return! I’m not ok with our community being discriminated against by having a designated smoking area. This is NOT ok! It will not benefit me in any ways, but rather increase my migraines as it gets worse by the weed smell and smoke. i am a non-smoker so no benefit to me. No, none what so ever. It would not benefit me at all. I live down the hill from the park and there is already a homeless population living beside the community garden. Why not make it an safe injection location as well? The drop in center is right across the bridge? What kind of people do you think it's going to attract? it wouldn't It would be a detriment to the area it would not It wouldn't. I live in a condo building across the street from Murdoch Park. I would smoke on my patio, as many occupants do at the moment. No Benefit. it is a solution to a problem that will not exist and spending my tax dollars on it.
It wouldn’t I don’t believe it is necessary. It wouldn’t, it’s too far. There is absolutely no benefit in providing this site to the neighborhood as a whole or myself as a property owner in the neighborhood. It wouldn't. As a resident of Bridgeland, I have certain reservations. I certainly feel that cannabis products should not be lumped in with alcohol in terms of policy. The restrictive nature of vape pens or consumables seems archaic and frankly quite silly, but in the wake of that, I’d say let’s try it.
32/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
No benefit. I’m a homeowner and if I chose to use cannabis for recreational purposes I could do it in my own home. Not at all It wouldn’t. It would be a detriment. No benefit. it wouldnt i live too far away Not at all. I have a 4 year old child and I do not see this as beneficial to her, our family or the community of Bridgeland. This location is very near to Langevin School (Elementary and Junior High) and these children play at Murdoch Park - before, during and after school. It wouldn’t. It would be a high detriment to my young niece’s property value and safety as she has a condo 2 blocks away. close to home can walk It would NOT be of benefit to me in any way!!! It would not Not a benefit to me. It is not a benefit. It will draw increased traffic and draw people who are seeking to ingest a drug. Just as people consuming need to responsibly not drive while under the influence the city should responsibly not create a public congregation place for people under the influence. This is a definitely not a benefit to me. There are already issues with break ins and homeless people coming into the neighbourhood and surroundings looking for bottles and this new proposal will add to the problem. Zero - it does not. In fact it's negative benefit - takes away benefit of my enjoying the park. I get nauseous from the smell when it's been illegally consumed now. Not at all I would love to have a space to go to smoke with my friends once it's legal, since my condo bylaws will prohibit doing it at home. I don't want to live in fear of being kicked out for wanting to do a legal recreational activity. No benefit to me IT WONT There would be no benefit to me or my family. I do not support any site in or around Murdoch Park. It would not, it would make my two year old's favorite play area unsafe No, I smoke on my patio It would be of no benefit whatsoever. I would use the space. It would also centrally locate an area for people to smoke. This is much better than people smoking on the street or in alley ways or parks where families may be.
No benefit to me, or my community. I'm not anti pot, I do consume occasionally. But I believe if you can't smoke it there are other ways to consume.
33/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Not at all Not at all. I don't use marijuana. It does not, those wanting to smoke cannibis do not want to be herded like cattle, and neighbours do not want it densified in the park. Follow the rules of cigarettes This would be of benefit as I smoke marijuana for pain and it is not easily accessible for me to relieve my pain with no where to smoke comfortably. No benefit. I'm allergic to cannabis in all its forms. Allowing it in my neighborhood means the it will diffuse through the air then through my windows in summer. Although it would benefit me directly, I believe it is important to our nemebers of the Bridgeland community that live in condos/appartments. It will not benefit me or my neighbours - people smoke pot already anywhere and everywhere, we don't need a designated 'pot garden'. Let establishments offer spaces for folks - just like alcohol.
Not at all. No Since no one in my family consumes or plans to consume there is not much direct benefit. However living in a condo a block away with my wife and small children, potentially if people use the bench rather than their balcony it could help me protect my children from unwanted exposure. Would not benefit me. It would not. It would not be a benefit to me or anyone I know It doesn’t It likely would not benefit me. I do not anticipate people using the designated cannabis consumption areas very much. I believe they will consume cannabis in the same areas that people smoke cigarettes, since these areas already have ash trays and are much more widespread and convenient.
No benefits!!!! This consumption area would be of no benefit to me, my family or my neighbourhood. Doubt it will be a benefit to Gian-Carlo next election because I will vote for anyone but him.
All are too far to be of benefit it would not be a benefit. if anything it would make the area less desirable now. What a strange first question. Although I applaud [personal information removed] for standing up and identifying 3 areas in his ward, the overall proposal is misguided. Not at all It is absolutely bizarre to even think of this as a suitable site. It is no benefit to me and I do not feel I have to endure the stinky odor. I live nearby.
34/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
There would be no positive benefit to me. I cannot stand the smell of weed, why should I be prevented in the enjoyment of my neighborhood. It really should be developed into a "pub" like scenario. It would not. None, it's a detriment to our neighbourhood. I live immediately across from this area which already has issues with open drinking, drug use, see needles, and vagrancy. We have been patrolling as well as beautifying the area to mitigate such behaviour, this would be a dangerous step back. Not at all. Many families with young children hang out in this park, Being surrounded by people from all over the City who have come here to smoke dope would be detrimental to community members. None. None It may not benefit me as I live in a private residence, however I can see the need for places that people can legally consume cannabis since the bylaws that Council have put into place do not take these into consideration. No there should be no public consumption allowed. Just like alcohol this should not be allowed publicly. I do not want my kids to see public consumption of pot or alcohol. Neither is acceptable publicly. I occasionally go to this park for sports or walking by There is no benefit. Its 2 blocks from the elementary school! No benefit!!, , What ??? Zeroooooo benefit! No It would not, in any way, be beneficial to me or my children. I vehemently oppose this concept. Focus on getting lounges/cafes approved. No. Not at all. It wouldn’t be beneficial. I disagree with having this site in bridgeland. No benefit. Horrified with this option. Bought at the Radius for family atmosphere in the area, now there will be drug sales nearby encouraged by this drug using area. It’s close by It wouldn't, its bad enough that since legalization talks started that I am exposed to cannabis and who knows what chemicals in public spaces, along the river, in our parks, walking to work downtown, on the ctrain, ctrain platforms/bus stops and in my building (vent problem). Solve this problem 1st!
It would be of no benefit to me at all. It would not
35/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
No benefit. It wouldn't. The potential for 24/7 consumption (again, potential) outside my front door is of no benefit. It would NOT and it would be a harm to the community and future developments of our main community area of Bridgeland. The community has worked hard to clean up, reduce drugs and related issues, this would be a set back. If motivated for 'visitors' (no hotels) or 'renters' why not downtown??
It would not. Not at all. It would be if no benefit. It would provide a safe area for people to consume cannabis. I object to this question. Why not ask if I am in favor or not rather than a leading question. The answer is I am not in favour. For me the whole point of legalizing pot was to take the load off the legal system and remove the criminal element. Not so people can corrupt the neighbourhood. It would be of no benefit to me or to the community. used as place to smoke when I am in the area away from my home. In all honesty, I will smoke wherever I want, like I currently do, away from crowds or children. The benefit here is mainly to reduce the stigma associated to marijuana and open the minds of people to allow a greater capacity to use.
It’s not and it’s ridiculous It would not, I am tax payer in Bridgeland for the last 15 years, this type of idea is ridiculous and obscene. smoke and drink on your own property. I have two kids under 10 and this type of proposal is detrimental to the neighborhood. It wouldn't. Why is it only [personal information removed]'s Ward that is looking for these sites? I find it quite odd that he's the only member of council proposing locations within the City. This whole process is redundant. I see minimal benefit. It's an designated area I can avoid with my children. For the many individuals living in the large condo's in Bridgeland its reasonably accessible. This is no benefit to me at all and a major detractor for the community as a whole. I do not support this. This has no benefit to me as I do not smoke marijuana. This would not be of benefit to me. My condo looks right over the park. I will stop going down the hill to Bridgeland for lunch/dinner I do not see any benefit It would not benefit me nope. Rather concerned it will impact the neighbourhood in a negative way
36/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
A major dis-benefit; I already am fed up with miscreants, scofflaws, crackheads, homeless sleeping rough, First Nations reps swearing at me as I clean up their refuse, crack kits, beer cans and Listerine empties. I live 120 m from this proposed site. Just means more negatives. It would not-it would be a detriment. It would not, it would be an absolute deterant and lower the property value of my house NO It wouldn’t be a benefit. This is the wrong area for a cannabis park. Would not benefit me. Would not benefit me It wouldn’t. This is an awful idea, considering this park is the heart of the neighbourhood and filled with kids and families. Will not benefit me. It would not Absolutely terrible idea. Zero benefit to the fabric of the community. Would significantly endanger the children who frequent the playground to introduce this drug and other drugs in an open environment, and damage the very benefit that the park is designed to provide to everyone who frequent it.
It would not. In absolutely no way. It is the most ridiculous location possible for our community. It is the heart of our neighborhood and has the highest density of children playing. This would be of zero benefit to myself and my community. It’s taken bridgeland more than 10 years to be transformed into the family community it is today and this recommended change would destroy the character we’ve worked so hard to build. It would not. Although I agree with legalization, I am not a smoker of either weed or tobacco. This community is full of young families and I think the consumption area should be somewhere more secluded to my community. No benefit to me. STRONGLY OPPOSE! It wouldn't. it is a very poor plan. It wouldn't! This consumption site would not benefit me. I do not believe our family spaces should be use for people to smoke pot. People from all over the city will be flocking to the parks proposed from other areas which concerns me regarding driving while under the influence.
No it is of no benefit to me or 98% of residents here - this proposal is a big threat to safety/ health of our family oriented village. Most Calgarians indicated pot should not be consumed in public realm. Listen!! Legalize pot cafes instead where access, behaviour and other concerns can be managed
37/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It would not be of benefit as it would density cannibus use in close proximity to parks in a community filled with young families. None it would not NOT AT ALL No benefit to me This proposed consumption site would provided nothing but negative effects. Bridgeland is an area that has a large concentration of social services aiding addicts. My building has experienced a number of break-ins It would not benefit me in any way. It would be detrimental. Of no benefit /detriment No, it would be detrimental to my health (asthma) and that of my grandchild and other children who use this area, including those from a nearby school, who use the field and pathway as part of their outdoor ed program. we walk past when going to play on the field and playground as do other families
I am able to consume cannabis on my private property, so I don't think I would personally be using this area. No benefit. None whatsoever - what a terrible idea. If someone needs to take cannabis for medical reasons they can take oils that last for 8-10 hours in the body, or vape every 2-3 hours if needed. This is known from experience. You do not need to be hanging around smoking it in a park. I own a home with a backyard, so this proposal will not benefit me I oppose the idea of Murdoch Park being one of your designated areas for smoking pot. We have a lot of seniors, children, adults in that area that would like to use the park for sports, family activities, etc. We have a lot of dogs and marijuana is extremely toxic for pets.
It will not benefit our family at all. Please do not go ahead with this site for cannabis consumption
Too far it won’t, we will need some spaces in the West part of Calgary, Aspen area
NO BENEFFIT. (I'm sure cannabis users from the other nearly 200 residential neighborhoods, in our city population of 1.5 million, will be pleased.) No benefit to me and a detriment if I have to inhale cannabis smoke. Please consult medical authorities re dangers of second hand and third hand cannabis smoke. I have no plans to consume pot and see no benefit in cannabis consumption areas. Why is the input questions one-sided to give only positive responses for a proposed cannabis consumption area? It would not, at all.
38/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
No benefit at all. We have way too many homeless around this area, and numerous break-ins. Bridgeland shouldn't provide the place to consume cannabis to add up more issues in the area.
It would not as it is far from home, not near c-train so if i needed to use it I would have to illegally drive impaired or pay to travel there. There will be no benefit to me, my family, or my community whatsoever. I am absolutely appalled that the City and specifically [personal information removed] would consider this area - at a public park in a residential community on a heavily used public pathway - for a cannabis consumption area. Poor judgment.
It isn't. no benifit It would not - I oppose this use of the space. It wouldn't benefit me. This would be of no benefit to me and likely of no benefit to the rest of the City, including cannabis consumers. They will not travel to this location to stand in a 25 square metre patch of dirt to smoke a joint. It will become a target for drug dealers who will go to where the customers are.
No it would not be beneficial, it would be a detrimental to the neighbourhood. No absolutely NOT. How are we as parents supposed to keep our kids away from drugs when it is constantly in the media (via the hype surrounding legalization), being sold in neighborhood stores, and is now proposed to be consumed in the same location as our kids recreate? I think this area benefits anyone taking public transit. This spot is good for those who are heading downtown and want a spot to smoke on the way, since it’s within walking distance of Bridgeland/Memorial Station. It promotes safe driving habits by having a place to smoke nearby the transit.
This is absolutely not of benefit to me at all. I do not consider there would be any benefit Absolutely NO benefit. This takes away the level of comfort and safety in our neighborhood. NO good reason to have a designated area. The smell itself will decrease property values. If people want to smoke badly enough, they'll find a place. No need to aid them. [personal information removed] needs to walk before he runs.
Not of benefit to me personally. I think a central location is more convenient for the clients to get to. Since there is a south site already at Sheldon Chumir which is south of the river, I think the Bridgeland site which is north of the Bow River is the best choice. It is a good north site.
This is not at all appropriate to be within the same park as where children walk to school, play sports in summer and tobaggon in winter. There is no benefit to this area.
39/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I do not use cannabis but I also do not support prohibition. The current Bylaws do not allow for people who do not own their own home or may be visiting the city to have an opportunity to consume cannabis even if it is a legal substance after October 17. I support the City in addressing the issue.
It's not - it would be a detriment and Riverside residents are overwhelmingly opposed!
It would be of NO benefit to me or to community. I think designated consumption areas are a terrible idea. This encourages people to drive to the park, indulge, and then drive home while under the influence. Although I am in favour or cannabis legalization, I see no need for designated areas.
Because my tenant agreement and condo bylaws prohibit smoking in the apartment and building I live in. Not having an are like this will de facto negate my rights to consume cannabis.
Being SELFISH of course the area be of benefit to me no matter what as long as I smoke cannabis. But I care for children even if I were not a resident of this area. This is a FAMILY park. It is not safe anyways for smoker on winter because the area is a slope, good for toggobani playing for kids. I personally won't be going there, however the condo complex I live in and others nearby can easily take advantage of this site. Will be happy not to have everyone smoking on their balconies.
None. No. This location is likely to compound the use of illegal and controlled substances (18+) which are already abused within the community. Policing Stats provide evidence of a worsening issues within the community. http://www.calgary.ca/cps/Pages/Statistics/Calgary-Police-statistical-reports.aspx
It would not. There are no benefits, only downsides to putting a consumption site in this location. It absolutely would not be a benefit and it would be a detriment to seniors who walk on Center Avenue and should be kept far away from Center avenue. Zero benefit, no use. This will have negative impacts on the entire community which uses this park a lot. Absolutely no benefit. No. No one would use the consumption area, people will continue to smoke pot as they do now, but popping outside for 2 minutes or going on a walk. The private sector will eventually create legitimate spaces for people to join together and consume, with other amenities such as food, music and space.
It is NOT of any benefit. It will become an increased safety concern for me as a resident living across the street who uses this area to walk to/from downtown It wouldn't. Not in favor of ANY "designated" sites in Calgary It doesn't. Increased personal safety concern
40/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
As someone who is like not to use cannabis in public, I think it's useful to have designated spots for others so I can plan or at least be informed of where people will be smoking. If I did consume, this location is large (could still be used by others) and close to transit/accessible.
There is no benefit to me. I do not consider a Consumption Area of any type compatible with a community with young families and several schools. Provides a safe place to consume outside of home / away from children or people who do not wish to consume cannabis None whatsoever. I live in a nearby condo. This will be great when I, or friends and family who are visiting, wish to use cannabis. It will also be beneficial if guests wish to avoid cannabis smoke... Currently, people smoke cannabis on the benches at the north-side of the park which is much more difficult to avoid. It is ridiculous to limit legal cannabis in public spaces. If people are not allowed to use it in a rental or condo, how can you expect citizens to travel to one of four parks? You want people driving stoned? I am opposed to the proposed drug use area, and SHOCKED that the suggested drug use area is so close to residential homes,sports flds,play grounds which have children, potentially exposing them to drug users and sellers. You are out of touch with my beliefs. I will remember this on voting day
Would not benefit me I rent a condo across the street from Murdoch Park. This bylaw would not benefit me. I appreciate the intention to support those without access to a consumption space. However, I feel strongly that it should be the renter’s responsibility to seek out appropriate housing permitting smoking if needed.
This consumption area does not provide any benefits to me or any of the residences in Bridgeland. it would not, terrible choice it would be of no benefit to me, I am opposed to this spot being used for consumption of pot This consumption area would NOT benefit me. I don’t think it would be beneficial for the area. No benefit to me whatsoever. It would not benefit me. Not beneficial. This is a bad idea, no benefit to anyone Close proximity to train station and downtown work space. Similar to having a beer after work, downtown office workers can stop here to relax socially before heading home. It would not benefit me at all. It would be a hindrance for my young family to access a park with active drug use. I don't understand how this would be a benefit to anyone...my area is already full of alley walkers and homeless people, why do I want to attract recreational drug users as well?????
41/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
This would not be a benefit to me. I am very concerned that this has been selected without adequate consideration for folks who live and go to school and are active in the Bridgeland neighbourhood. If you must have a site in Bridgeland I'd suggest you make it further East near Tom Campbell hill
It would give me a safe place to consume cannabis if my condo building banned it This consumption area would have a negative impact on both me and my community; no benefit at all It would not. Having been addicted to marijuana for 19 years, and clean for a year, I am not looking forward to having to smell it in my neighbourhood Absolutely no benefit to me or my community. It would create harm greatly exceeding any benefit.
None, I am strongly opposed to this proposal. There is no benefit to me. This would be of no benefit to me, and would potentially cause harm NO BENEFIT WHATSOEVER. Children from Langevin go through there ALL THE TIME!! Have you even consulted with Langevin? Do you know what Langevin is? It is a science school. this will not benefit me or the community of bridgeland it would not benefit me. I don't think it benefits the neighbourhood at all. I can't understand why [personal information removed] is advocating for this in his ward when he ran under the banner of "great neighbourhoods". I wish I had voted differently. It would not be of any benefit to me. I think it will cause and exacerbate problems. I am strongly opposed. Although I do perceive, and do not discount, the equity issues that have motivated a response, I believe this idea is a bad response, too soon, and in a bad place. It is ill informed. There is no benefit at all to having cannabis consumed in this area. Can’t think of any benefit. It would not benefit me in any way. I do not use cannabis and this area is not appropriate for cannabis use. Not at all. I do not see any personal benefit whatsoever. This is NOT a benefit! I’m trying to understand why there has to be a common pot smoking area? I am 100% AGAINST this idea. Over and over I have to shake my head at the ideas coming out of this [removed]’s office. There are seniors and children at the park and this will increase people loitering No benefit. It would not, this area does not qualify as a potential consumption area as it does not meet the criteria required. Children pass through this area at all hours. I strongly oppose this location or any location in Bridgeland, as a resident for over 18 years now.
42/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It would be of NO benefit to me. This area would not be of any benefit to me as I do not wish to participate in such activity, nor do I want to be near any such residue ( smoke) as I walk this area from time to time.
This area provides a legal place for me to consume cannabis that is close to my rental apartment.
It's not as much benefit to me as I own a house, but it would likely benefit those in the condo and apartment buildings around. Close to where I live I would not benefit from this consumption area. It would not benefit me. It would be a concern because, as a designated cannabis park, would attract a concentration of cannabis users at a central location in Bridgeland-Riverside that is well used by the public. Current (by)laws are adequate until cannabis cafes are addressed (by the City!).
No benefit to me. It would bring more stoned people to the area. Possibly 7 Eleven and the restaurants along 1st avenue might benefit when the patrons of the park get the munchies.
No benefit at all There would be no personal benefit to me, as I am not a cannabis user, nor do I live in a condo or apartment building. It would not benefit me. No smoking in public areas please. It wouldn't. It would be in the way of where I walk or bike. Kids from schools and the neighbourhood and dog walkers regularily use this route This area would be of no benefit to me, and it may actual cause me negative effects particularly in terms of my property value, my safety (I already refuse to go to that corner at night because of the people who congregate and party and fight, fornicate, yell/scream).
It would not be of benefit to me...this is an area that is used by children as a tobogganing hill all winter and in the summer is also used by children as it is adjacent to the soccer pitch and very close to public pathways and the community playground...
As a resident of bridgleand it would NOT benefit our family in anyway. We frequent this park often with our children both in the summer and winter months and there is already a lot of crime in the area and unsavory individuals who hang out at the park. A consumption site would only add to this.
Consumption in this area would NOT be of benefit to me, my children, my pets, all of whom use this area and walkways in a recreational capacity year 'round.
43/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It would be very beneficial. As a renter in a condo, I don't have the option of smoking in a garage or backyard. Allowing public smoking areas is inclusive to condo people residing in condos. I would like to have the option to smoke outdoors without penalty by condo board.
No it will not benefit me as I do not smoke. None This would be great to have in the area. I think Calgary's by-laws on this are far too restrictive to begin with, but I'm glad to see there are some alternative ideas popping up. Overall though, I think it would be better to mirror the plans outlined in Edmonton. if doesn't This site would not benefit me, nor the community. I do not support his location, nor the use of any public parks for a designated cannabis park. No. This would not benefit me. It would be a concern, as a designated cannabis park, this would attract a concentration of cannabis users and drinkers which will cause more crime in the area which we already have enough of. Transit accessible, high density inner city location. Close to downtown for tourist/visitor traffic. No other sites in North. It would be on NO benefit to me No benefit. It would not benefit me. No benefit. I do not smoke or plan to in the future. This area would not benefit me as I feel it is not a very well-lit area for after dark activity as well there are many children using the adjacent sidewalks and thoroughfares.
There would be NO benefit to me and it is FAR to close to a junior high and well used park space. I ABSOLUTELY disagree with this proposal. It No benefit at all horrible plight to put on our neighbourhood. Absolutely no benefit. First of all, the proposed location in Murdoch Park seems to violate the criteria set by the city with regards to a cannabis park location. It's within close proximity (less than 100 meters) to not just a playground, but a sports/playing field and a dog park.
Non This consumption area is not of benefit to me. I live close to the proposed area and believe that its designation will be adverse to myself and family. Murdoch Park is a place where children play including my grandchildren.
44/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
NO BENEFITS. Why can't you have designated cafe's, lounges or restaurants with special licenses to serve cannabis? Why does it need to be a public space? Parks are meant for public space. Do you honestly believe those individuals will look at the bylaws above and follow through?? CERO BENEFITS, I STRONGLY OPPOSE TO THIS. There would be no benefit for me, my family, friends, neighbours and community in this proposed consumption location Great option to consume cannabis This site would not be a benefit to me or my community None. It would be completely DETRIMENTAL to me as a resident in the community. I don’t smoke and do not want the second-hand smoke, odour and social disorder your proposed site would attract. It is distressing and UNACCEPTABLE that this is being proposed - near schools/kids’ play areas in my community.
It wouldn’t. Our condo board is very diligent. They will likely treat cannibas like smoking. Nuisance issues will be addressed and otherwise permitted. Zero benefit. City Aldermen that came up with this idea are totally out touch with what the community wants. So far it was a waste of time to propose the consumption area. The aldermen should have approached the community first, not put out a news release, then ask for input.
It will be of no benefit to me as I do not smoke and will not be smoking weed It would be of no benefit to me.Quite the opposite.I regularly walk past this place and do not want to smell that stuff nor encounter the people using it.Why should I be obliged to change my route to accommodate them.Folks who are high can be unpredictable in behaviour.Do not use my tax $ on this.
Would not be a benefit - increased crime, increased littering, fire hazard, increased impairment. In close proximity to children’s play areas/activities and a school, across from a church. In complete antithesis to the spirit of Murdoch Park as a community hub.
It wouldn't No benefit to myself or my family. I bring my dogs here I bring my dogs here and enjoy cannabis here already It would be great! This would create a space where cannabis could be consumed safely. It would allow for community to be created and would limit the areas in which cannabis is consumed otherwise.
45/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Yes. Live close by. Would be a safe and visually stimulating area to legally consume cannabis.
A nice place to relax and smoke. Safe community environment with others who are like me. I live in one of the condos here where I can't consume my cannabis legally! Not at all - in fact it would compound the disbenefits to me. I am always cleaning up rubbish & litter along pathway and in off-leash area. No benefit!! On the contrary, it will be harmful! no benefit just traffic issues. No - such a terrible idea that I thought it was a joke. Nobody that cares would go along with this.
It would be a negative. Most certainly not. No absolutley not! I wouldn't benefit from this. N/A It would not benefit me at all. No Negatively impact area It doesn't. What a stupid location to select. This is beneath you [personal information removed]! Whoever proposed this should be fired! Not at all. It would cause health problems as I have severe allergies [sic] to smoke and weed.
Not. It will not. Only if the City also provides a designated BBQ Area for me because , like smoking , my condo does not permit BBQs on my balcony. I can't see how it would be of much benefit to me as I don't smoke /consume cannabis. Possibly, if I take up cannabis after legalization I could go there and partake with fellow consumers.
Nothing. It wouldn't. It would be a blight on the community (visit bridgeland/riverside facebook page for our negative opinions) It would be of absolutely NO benefit to me!! Quite the contrary, it would be a huge disappointment.
None There is no benefit . The Murdoch Park consumption area would attract litter, social disorder, unpleasant fumes & risk to young people & dogs. NO benefit at all
46/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
NO! Of no benefit. It would NOT. This community has struggled for years to keep the riff raff from the drop in center from destroying the area. You cannot be gullible enough to believe that drug consumersof all drugs are not going to be here when they know the police will not bother them.
Not a benefit to me. No This consumption area would not be of benefit to me or any member of my family here in Bridgeland. I am unclear as to the reasoning beind requiring a public cannabis consumption area in the first place? Why do we need this? No benefit at all - to me or the other seniors in the area or the young people using the park.
None! It would not. There would be no benefit to me or my family. No benefit all but potential harm, damage and threat. Took a long time to educate the public the harm of second hand smoke. Don’t see why re-introduce similar harmful substance to a park.
No benefit. It will only stop me from coming to the park. It does not. It wouldn't benefit me or spouse. Silly idea. No benefit to me (a resident in Bridgeland). In fact approval of this consumption area will discourage me and all my friends from using this area for outdoor exercise and activities.
Not at all. It's a really dumb location. Too close to school & playground. It's no benefit at all! from a concerned citicine [sic] I does not! It wouldn't. I'm a concerned grade 7 Langevin student. It does not benefit me at all. It will make my health worse because I have to smell it all in and it could even cause cancer. It won’t at all. Absolutely NO benefit! I DO not want to smell it everyday. It would not. This is a main entry point to our community what a terrible impression to be met by foul smelling cannabis smoke why build a special playground for physically & mentally handicapped children if you are going to expose them to this? No benefit
47/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Absolutely none! It would not benefit me, personally. If I chose to use cannabis, I will consume in my own home, or in a friends' home. Not at all, more or less taking away the benefit of the Bridgeland Community. If I was a struggling dealer this would be a great place to sell product. Lots of underage children too!! No, no, no. It will be a disruptive unneccssary [sic] use in an area used extensively by children & families. It would not. NO Not at all! From a concerned citizen. It is not a benefit at all. It will make healthcare worse, and destroy the cummunity [sic]. It wouldn’t…. I like how clean and open this park is, I think it should stay that way This location will not benefit me in any way. It wouldn't! I am not in favour of any location. [personal information removed] No benefit to me. No, please…(we live just a block away) Not at all!!! Absolutely would not be of benefit to me. Wrong location! It wouldn't @ all Very beneficial as there would be a place outdoors to do so- -accessible - nice view and landscape There is no benefit to me. It won't! NOT! Stupid Stupid Stupid It is not at all! NO It is not a benefit. It is a safety concern and a property value concern. I think the location is suitable. I would like to be able to smoke in peace. NOT AT ALL Not good at all children play here. None @ all. None at all Not at all. None or negative
48/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It would not benefit me. Not at all! Absolutely no benefit to me or to the majority of Bridgeland / Riverside residents.
2. Are there any issues we should consider with this proposed location?
There is a small playground on the one side of the park, I find a lot of people in the community do not agree and no matter what there will be complaints in this area as everyone is very stuck up and think people who smoke are drug addicts. I am not. Yes. All you have to do is be a part of this community and spend some time here to realize that Murdoch Park is an area of great concern in the neighborhood - from encampments to disposed needles and so much more. No. That hill is fairly steep heading down into the grassy bowl. Is the idea to build a patio or other fenced area? I often go to this area (it's a good place to park with a lunch I have brought, I sit on the sloping grass) to have lunch or meet friends, a smoking area would be a nuisance to me and my friends
Yes! This is a public park with many kids and adults using the soccer facilities, it is a direct pathway from Langevin school to the LRT, the zoo, St Patrick’s Island, etc. our students walk through this area daily. There is also a playground located here Yes. Stop use of cannabis There is already enough drugs around with being so close to drop in centre perhaps more food trucks or a circle k should be built to provide snacks. Yes, Bridgeland already has problems with druggies, and homeless, and thieves, we don't need this in the area. Yes we already have three liquor stores and the drop in center walking distance, why can’t this be in Ramsay or renfrew or Winston heights why ya again?? Langavin school often uses that green space for outdoor activities why can’t tbis be somewhere else ! In the winter, this is a tobogganing hill for many kids in the area. How can we proceed to the park without inhaling smoke? Yes, this is a location which is already a problem due to homeless encampments. Calls to the police are responded to, but I think this will complicate matters. This is a park where kids go to play and is an open field. To have any type of smoking here is a horrible idea. People are not allowed to smoke cigarettes in public, we don't feel compelled to provide them a space, cannabis is no different.
49/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
This location is right beside our neighbourhood toboggan hill and the park as a whole is used instensivly by children and families during the spring for soccer season. The Langevin School children regularly use the field for outdoor phys-ed Area is beside an off leash area and is located in an area that is already a long standing problem location for social disorder in our community Yes, it is in the same park as the largest playground in the community, and directly next to a soccer field where children are almost always at play. Consumption there is bad enough, combustion and second hand transfer to children is wildly unnacceptable. IT'S PART OF A PARK USED BY CHILDREN! During the school year it's used for gym classes. It's utilized on the weekends for many family activities. What is wrong with our Councillor!? Has he been smoking too much product?! There is already a severe drug abuse problem that spreads into this area, this would just attract more drug use. It is very close to the Langevin school and by a park where my kids play soccer and a hill where we play in the snow. We walk past there a lot with the stroller to pick up kids at Bridgeland daycare or when we bike around the park. No This area is well used by the Public and community for Playground, Soccer, Farmers Market, Festivals and Special Events. No one wants to See or Smell the pollution. Students from Langevin School use the park and adjacent pathway daily for gym class but also noon hour unsupervised activities - the whole park should be considered a playground area with a high concentration of child and youth activity It is along the walk to a play park In my experience, the locations is largely used by youth under 13, particularly in winter as a sledding site. I am often there with my children year round. The exposure would be detrimental to the youth. Second hand smoke, CPTED issues with this location, distance from the church, distance from the soccer field (kids playing) current problem with dumping in that location. The wooden stairs behind the subsidized housing leading up to the area are already a breeding ground for illicit activity. Adding a cannabis consumption area right next to it would only make the issue worse. Yes - too close to kids. Unregulated area with a regulated substance. No way to stop Underage users. High social disorder in this area. On major public path to key locations - train school zoo, park playground soccer fields community hall The soccer field and playground meters away?.... 1. I work at the K-9 school in Bridgeland and we use the surrounding areas daily! This has the potential to negatively impact our walking field studies, physical education time and the general area and safety for the young children!
50/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Yes it is near an area where children often play (the hilly slope just north of it), and right in front of a church, in front of a nice residential area and along the bike path. People don’t want to smell second hand smoke or have large groups around. You should consider the proximity to Langevin school kids that daily use the Soccer fields for outdoor Gym. Do they need to witness this ? There is also a Childrens Cottage and Daycare very near. The existing condo start up ( halted) would never sell. This is very close to the children's playground and the community centre. Too close. Cannabis consumption must be kept to private homes Nope. Loitering, garbage and joints being thrown on the ground, drug dealing Location is on a major pathway through the neighbourhood making it accessible to children and youth on a regular basis I personally don’t think so. Children play in the area. I walk my dog along there and do not wish to have to endure the smell. Also concerned about my safety and others Yes. This park is used for recreational sports and fitness and should not include a cannabis smoking area. Cannabis should be aligned with that of alcohol and the rules around public consumption. im concerned how close it is to downtown, drop in center, and the area already having quite a large presence of street/crime issues No Yes. Bridgeland is a family friendly community. We can drive to Tuscany or Auburn bay to consume cannibus My children attend Langevin school and I am a teacher at the school. Quite often out phys ed staff and the school as a whole use the field for special events like Terry Fox Day run and track training. Yeah, people have to drive to said locations. Which means the Calgary Police can bust people who drive There are people like myself who have severe allergies to smoke and would be unable to visit any parks where public consumption of cannabis is allowed. Do you expect people to pull up in cars, get out to smoke and then drive home.... Ridiculous. People smoke where they want just like cigarettes. Outside of the bar, pub, restaurant, walking down the sidewalk, walking my dog, sitting on my patio etc... Taxpayers should not have to pay for cleanup and those that do litter should be subject to stiff fines. YES...this area is too close to the playground, that grassy bowl in particular is used in the winter for toboganning by families and children. As well, this area already has problems with encampments, drug use (check 311 and police non-emerg reports).
51/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Yes. This site is part of a large sports field and play area that we use as a family multiple times a week all year. We are here at the playground often with our child. We use the field for picnics, soccer, and tobogganing in the winter. Yes. Since the development and installation of lights surrounding the homeless shelter and east village, there has been a substantial increase in the amount of mischievous and unwanted individuals that are already consumed with alcohol and drugs not enough food venues. next to this spot in the same park there is a field where many children play sports and I don't believe having a designated site so close to children playing organized and spontaneous sports is a good idea. A consumption site located further away is best My concern is with the proximity of the ctrain and areas with children. It is not an area well lit enough at night to discourage prolonged use of the area. My alternative to this specific location would be the plaza between general ave and 1st ave Not really a public space, really private. Could lead to youth abuse at the location. Very close to where Bridgeland Soccer participants play their weekly games. U-4 kids' play on Monday and Wednesday at 6 p.m. from April - June. Also near a very popular and relativity new playground that daycare kids' use during the day. The only issue I see is its proximity to a park. however as it stands people walk all around that park smoke pot and God knows what else. consider making the rules the same as liquor. That smoke lingers and wafts and I don't want to have to be pushed out of my space by people in the minority. I thought it was still "majority rules", rights or not. This park, as well as many other public spaces, are suitable for consumption. yes, there are schools in bridgeland. I would not want my kids to be smelling it while they play outside. Generally, I think of this space as a positive space to bring kids in inner city Has the city increased the police budget to supply more police officers to patrol these sites? Public safety is at risk! Its proven that since safe injection sites have been implemented in the city, areas surrounding the sites are not SAFE! I feel that this site is too close to Langevin School. this are is highly utilized by childern especially in the winter while tobaganing. it is also a crossroads for childeren walkong or being walked to schools from tge nany daycares...this is a very poor choice of lication for such a purpose. Yes! This park contains a very busy playground, the community center and soccer fields. Kids should not be able to go near or see consumption in public anywhere! Our kids skateboard on the pathway through this area. I wouldn't want them to have pass through or near groups of intoxicated people. Neither alcohol nor cannabis have a place in our public parks
52/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Its next to a church and too close to kids playing fields as well as schools as kids are always walking these routes The Drop In Centre is too close and will only encourage more issues in our neighbourhood. It is also too close to the LRT and will discourage people from using it. We also have lots of elderly in this neighbourhood, they don't need this. Have nearby property owners been consulted? I imagine this would impact their property values in a very negative way. I likely wouldn't purchase residential property in close proximity to a designated cannabis consumption site. This location is a park that is used by children. It is in an area with families, and close to a community shopping an dining area, the trails by the river and the zoo. The community already suffers from issues from the rehab centre No, that is actually a great location between inner city N neighourhood and downtown Why is it so small? Why are cannabis users being treated like pariahs instead of adults? Yes. I use this park regularly and the walking paths that run along this proposed location and believe this to be a very poor location as I and many others would like to enjoy the park without having to be near inoxicated individuals in and around a Park yes its right beside a public pathway, a church and a green space used by pets, children, Etc. There is no need for ANY location. Closeness to the DI Center. My only concern with this spot would be during the winter months when it likely wouldn't be used as frequently - this is a popular tobogganing hill for children. None that I am aware of. Intimidating to pedestrians using this path. Will it really be kept clean?? Will the middle school students be sneaking down there at breaks? Yes, this is already a little unsafe due to its short distance to the homeless shelter. No one dares locking their bike here or it will be stolen in less than a day. There is a playground less than 100 metres away, there soccer field where kids play, and am off leash park were dogs could get sick with cannabis left over on the floor driving under the influence Too close to schools, playgrounds, park space. Proximity to children playing in the park. Langevin School uses the field below this location for running, soccer, etc. Also, kids from Bridgeland and neighbouring communities toboggan down this hill. This area already has challenges -- people drink alcohol and use drugs in the park. Yes, Bridgeland already has a lot of problems with drop in centre clients, drug addicts and theft, adding this really does not help the neighbourhood.
53/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
This is a drug. It can cause social disorder. Congregating users could attract problems. How will this be policed? Kids play here, walk here. If I t want to smell or breath smoke in a park. Can’t drink here No Close proximity to community school and public field the school uses daily. The community has many families and school aged children and this would be an inappropriate location for a safe consumption site. That area of the park is quite dark and also known for collecting garbage. More lighting will be required. Placate nearby homeowners d/t property value drop? There are too many exit points from this area for those engaged in underaged or other illegal activity. It is a commuting route to downtown and to Langevin school. It has very little seating and trash bins, probably need to consider those There are people who play sports in this area, have picnics, walks, play with their pets, and kids who play in the park nearby. We also have a farmers market on Thursdays in the summer on the other end of the park. Langevin School uses that route daily during the school year. Please call the school to ask for details. That is a popular local sledding spot for families with small kids. My children use this park and green space regularly. It is a continuous park/green space between the playground and the proposed site (no topographical boundary). My kids love running through the green space, up the hill to look over downtown/Riverside. Definitely. This park is frequented by children of all ages, festivals and family activities take place in this park. There is a church right there. And the near by schools is this park for the physical education. Not the right place. I don’t like the idea that everyone just has to stand around , some benches and stuff would be nice. Also this area is very hilly so people with accessibility issues (many cannabis users have disabilities) it may be hard to access this area Please don’t make this location legal, you’ll kill this nice neighbourhood. Close proximity to church and public area were kids are playing This is right in the middle of a seniors housing and long term care facility, along with several daycares in the area. Wind and sight lines, I think the area should have a fair bit of wind protection since it is at the end of the park. Helps prevent ash or hot embers flying all over the place. Sight lines to enclose the area away from people who still see it as taboo. Residence feel this may bring more unwanted guests / activities to the neighbourhood. This location is known for lack of correct needle disposal. Crime increase is big concern! Many children pass by / play near the area, raising concern for their safety.
54/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
The 7A St. consumption area is not only close to the LRT Stn but also to the proposed sales outlet which is proposing to stay open to midnight each day. This late-night availability will worsen the existing problems we have with the illegal drug users. Yes. It is a poorly lit area where quesitonable people are already congregating - often drinking/ camping out in the bushes. Close to 'off leash dog park' and playground. Off a main pathway people use to commute to and from Bridgeland on foot. Make sure the space has a trash can or dispenser so that the area doesn't get littered. Two blocks from an elementary junior high school and 1 block from playground and it is the top of the toboggan hill. Regular pathway for students. Students use the field for gym class. Proximity to playground, nearby high condo density, homelessness presence in nearby bow riverside. High concentration of users in 1 of just 4 public areas. Where to start, it's next to a church, a common walk path for people getting around the neighborhood, and where many people walk their dogs. This is a highly used play area - in the winter it is a popular toboggan hill and it's very close to a soccer field and playground. Not to forget, very close to a hillside that already experiences a lot of drug use and homelessness. Yes, parks are used for fitness and recreation for health. They should not be prioritized for unhealthy activities. It’s much too close to the drop in Centre. There is enough drug use in the area without permitting soft drug use. Proximal to a toboggan hill and park, adjacent to a church, and one block from a day home. This area is right beside a large park that is used by children throughout the year (walking/riding towards the playground, sledding in winter, Langevin students walking to physical education sessions, various day cares and play schools). The park is used daily by children, is close to a school a too close to the Driop In centre encouraging people to enter the neighbourhood as the nearest location. The church on the top of the hill. Quite a large number of children attend that church so concerns may come from the parents. There is already a high rate of crime in this area, adding a designated area for Cannabis consumption would likely perpetuate further issues. Yes. It’s close to a kids park there are enough drugs in this area already. The site will need to be clearly designated, as it is adjacent to a church, the community lands where children play, and also to a pedestrian path. Yes, the proximity of it being to the buildings, children and as well as an off-leash dog park (disposal of cannabis at risk for dogs to pick up and consume). I am a gr2 teacher at Langevin school and this is a high use area for our school. I often take my students to this area for many different activities and feel this would negatively impact my students.
55/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It is right above the community soccer field were kids are playing yes, there is a playground and the park is deisgned for sports, soccer, ultimate frisbee etc..... Those are at odds with a cannabis site. please keep it far far far away from children its a joke Kids and families do go to that spot. This will destroy their appreciation of the spot. This is a PUBLIC park, it should NOT be used for a private use only. This is a private activity, it should be a public use activity. I think this spot is too close to many public places and vulnerable portions of our population, including students, nearby seniors, church members and commuters who utilize the pathways to connect to their workplaces. no This is so wrong! I work in a healthcare facility 1 block from there. there r many schools and children walking along that path. kids tobaggan down that hill.there is a church. i park in the church for my work and do not want to walk by that every day. Parking, Traffic. Proximity to playgrounds and athletic fields. This is an area often used my students at Langevin School, aged 5-15. The space is used for school wide activitiew, sports teams and daily physical education. It seems close to a few homes. I don't live there, but I do wonder what those homeowners would think. The residences st the end of the street will suffer the odor of smoking. The bottom of the embankment already sees much traffic of a questionable nature. why should it be ok to smoke and get high in public but you cant drink in a public area Need to see how frequent and crowed this space gets. I don’t think the city understands how many people smoke pot in the city. Also regular visits to keep illegal selling down. I might raise some parking concerns there doesn't seem much parking is available There is a community association building nearby, which means diverse groups will be frequenting the area who will have mixed feelings about the designated smoking space. There is also a playground at the far side of the park, so parents may be concerned. Students from Langevin School (kindergarten-grade 9) use this space daily for physical education & walking to & from field studies. As an inner city school, they are already exposed to illegal drug use around our building...(contd below) Proximity to the Drop In Centre. Perhaps further west in the "off-leash" area or in McDougall Park would be better. There is the playground and community centre so far more kids visit Murdoch park. Perhaps if there was fencing and benches to keep usage confined to the one area. This is in the most public park in the community where tons of kids play, families hang out, and public events are held- why should part of it become a drug zone that parents now have to teach their kids to avoid? Plus it's RIGHT BESIDE major paths!
56/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
A few things. One, it's close to a church. Two, it's very close to BRCA which is very family focused. Three, we've had a lot of questionable characters by the C train in this area, don't want to attract more. This area is already frequented by drug users and homeless people. This will enhance the problem. Furthermore, there is a children’s playground 250m away from this site. That is not acceptable proximity CRIME, LOITERING, THE SMELL. Yes. Please explain how having a pot site is beneficial to the area? Do you honk those residents who are active in the area, who pay a lot of taxes should have to smell in continually throughout the day. Smell travels. Cannabis use would be permitted, but alcohol use would be illegal? are you serious with this?
Proximity to where child play, walking paths, nearby homes, etc There are families that use the parks. Why should drug use be encouraged in front of children?
It makes the site unusable to families and those who don't use this drug Yes, it is very close to Langevin School and the teens who hang around in the neighbor on their lunch breaks. What about winter? And, people gathering to party and the smell of canabis should not be a burden to the adjacent residents Close proximity to a park where kids play soccer all summer long. Toboggan park in the winter. The area is already a hangout for people spilling across the river from the drop in centre. Near by schools also I am concerned because we have two schools in the neighbourhood. The students at Langevin science are frequently making use of and exploring the community in and around Bridgeland. Bridgeland has many young families and our children need to have a voice Proposed site is within 2 blocks of an elementary/jr high. Do not need a consumption area so close to the school where children and teenagers often hang out. The field is used by Langevin for outdoor education almost daily. childern play in the area, the smell of cannibis. I have huge concern about the safety or nuisances with having it in Bridgeland I think this is likely far enough from the playground at the opposite end of the park, but there are a ton of kids aged 2-8 who play soccer less than 100 meters away from here. Keeping people under the influence away from them should be a priority. Garbage - will this be monitored, at least at first, since there will be an increase in traffic to the park. The city should not be designating public land for this purpose
57/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Yes! You have to be joking. This is right beside a soccer pitch where young players will be exposed to this sight. inappropriate, lots of children and families walking the dogs yes, this location is very close to the Calgary Science School. Many of the kids walk along these paths and use this park during the lunch hour. I feel this location is too close to multi-use areas minors use Langevin school uses Murdoch Park for field studies and their Phys Ed program. Selecting this site, although some distance from the physical school, is directly adjacent to an area students and teachers frequent, would dramatically change the area. Too close to community center and community playground. Near park with children playing, soccer, etc. This is right near one of the only off leash areas in bridgeland. I would be very concerned about my dog consuming butts of marijuana cigarettes. Definitely a potential health risk for off leash animals. It is an unnecessary proposal. Public parks should be left as dog parks or for people to enjoy without smoke inhalation and/or unexpected beahaviors.There are no public green spaces to consume alcohol so this should be the same. It should be consumed in private spaces such as homes. The designated sites are too far from many residential areas where most people live in Calgary. I think smokers will not use this space because of that reason and will smoke somewhere else.
A lot of sketchy people hang out around there This is where all the kids toboggan in the winter. Against public consumption areas. AToo Without 24/7 on-site monitoring, there is no feasible way of ensuring compliance or that users would respect limits, boundaries or rules in general. Community made up of vulnerable people, and children. Poor idea! You are proposing 3 sites in the whole city and that's only if the neighborhoods agree. What about medical? This is a family and kids- friendly area and should NOT be chosen as a designed area for smoking Cannabis. This neighbourhood is already attracting a lot of crime-related activities due to its proximity to downtown area and Homeless shelters, so not ideal This area is Hart of Bridgeland public space which is used by children and families all the time and this proposal would dramatically destroy bridgeland's future growth potential as well as live abilities for families This site is located close to Langevin school. Students from the school is the pathway daily for sporting activities on the soccer field, a route for many field studies and by junior high students during lunch.
58/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Too far from anywhere. As long as people are discreet let them smoke. This is a public space paid for by taxpayers and by instituting a consumption area here, it is no longer useable by me, or my family - a Calgary tax payer. Bridgeland already has a problem with illegal drug users. This will exasperate an existing problem. This location is near a playground, soccer field and school. We already have a large issue with crime, particularly robberies, and adding a consumption site will not reduce the crime rates in this neighbourhood. This field is used all the time by student at the Langevin school for gym class and recess. I believe Bridgeland is good place for a cannabis smoking area due to all the apartments but that particular field may not be the best. no Yes several. This is right beside the soccer field and toboggan hill where kids play. It is right beside a busy pathway that links to the community hall and transit. People rent this park for private and public events. Very busy path and green space. Cannabis should have the same rules as cigarette smoke and not need silly little consumption zones like this one. This allows detractors to say the issue is closed because there are 3 spots in the city to smoke cannabis. Should be able to anywhere NONE. Doesn't city council have anything better to spend their time on instead of getting on the 'hype' weed bandwagon ? This is a major area that students use to get to & from school. It is also used often when walking field studies from schools happen. Accessibility to calgarians. You should consider exponentially more locations. I am not against the legalization. I don't, however, want it near my kid. He plays soccer in the field below. He runs around the track of the park. We spent so many years trying to protect people from second-hand smoke and now they want to promote it. This is the most ridiculous idea council has ever considered. Has anyone even thought of the possible consequences? Shall we expect parks where beer can be openly consumed as well? What is next? We disagree with any proposed designated consumption sites. Need more locations, like my landlord’s yard. Every single one of the "limitations" proposed with consumption spaces renders this area unfit for the use. There are already problems there that make it difficult for families to safely use the space. Why compound the problem further? Access to minors. Tobogganing location for kids
59/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 it is near the Bridgeland / Riverside Community Centre, and Children's Cottage Society. Please do not have pick Murdoch Park. Access to minors. it is near the Bridgeland / Riverside Community Centre, and Children's Cottage Society. Please do not have pick Murdoch Park. crowd control, garbage clean-up, noise complaints etc Yes. There are lots of kids in the area. There is a soccer field where kids play. I exercise in the area too. There should NOT be any pot parks anywhere, people don’t put their cigarette buts in ashtrays, they won’t put their pot in one either. It will be used for other drugs, needles. Who will clean it up.
This location is much too close to the LRT station, several elderly care facilities and condominium residences. And if there are only a couple of the pot parks in the city, what kind of problems are going to be associated with this park becoming a destination site for public consumption? The police department are already over worked so how can they police these areas. There are designated cigarette areas outside hospitals which cannot be policed. Why do you think these parks can be policed. Do you think dopers can figure out OK areas? yes The police department are already over worked so how can they police these areas. There are designated cigarette areas outside hospitals which cannot be policed. Why do you think these parks can be policed. Do you think dopers can figure out OK areas? There is a children's playground nearby and a lot of families use Murdoch Park. Murdoch Park is a terrible location for a consumption area. NOT SUITABLE AT ALL. I don't feel my tax dollars should go to support a substance using park to clean it and provide cites funded maintence. I feel if you do this for cannabis you need to open up public parks for alcohol consumption what's the difference The city should consider why the general public should have to deal with the aroma of Cannabis in a public park that can be used by children. Proximity to soccer field, playground, residential homes across the street. In winter this hill is filled with small children tobogganing and sleding, Throughout the year children are taking soccer lessons, playing and learning to ride new bikes on the very safe pathway by this area. This is not a place for public consumption. YES! There are at least 3 day cares surrounding this location.... Kid U Bridgeland, Wee Wild Ones, Childrens Cottages Society, Pre-schools... Do some research before publicly proposing public cannabis sites!
60/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 proxomity to park, playground, proximity to children playing as this us a young new family communitu, proximity to church Yes, almost the entire area is used exclusively by young children and families throughout our 6 months of winter as a tobogganing area. The area immediately adjacent is a soccer field used almost exclusively by youth. This will detract from the safety and reputation of any community. I will not visit any location with my family where there is public consumption. Proximity to the community centre, playground, soccer field. Please consider the crime rate in Bridgeland. It is at an all time high. Please consider the families with young children, and the risks to them. The seniors throughout the area. The addicts and homeless we are already dealing with. Safety, people driving to this location, respect for the people who live close to this location.
Yes, why do we need this, smoke in your own home Can the City of Calgary be sued if a cannabis consumer over-consumes in the park, and then suffers from an accident? The same way that a bar patron can sue a bar owner if the bartender did not monitor over-consumption? again, lots of families were spotted tobogganing on the groomed slope... seasonally speaking. or do you just mean the rough slope where i walk my dog? The garbage, discarded joints, etc. Why mess up a beautiful park with the smell and litter, let alone the close proximity to homes and businesses. 1. Area overlooks natural escarpment which is often dry and prone to fires. 2. The many homes (often with kids) below this area have a right to clean air coming in their windows, the smell will affect many in this low lying area with limited wind flush. Schools, parks are so close by. It's essentially in a church parking lot. There is already considerable problems in that area with harder drug use. Needles, theft etc. Nothing i can think of This is close to the park my kids play in. And it is where we also go sledding in the winter. Proximity to the path, families might not like walking past This area is used by families, school children and daycares. It's in direct conflict for your proposed use. This won't resolve the issue of rentals/condos not allowing cannabis use in the city.
Parking, proximity to schools, parks, churches and that it is on a pathway to connect the ctrain to residential areas and businesses Yes. People drive there, consume, then drive home? This is dangerous! They can smoke in their own homes, why would they go to a park? We should not condone this behaviour in public anyway. It's unhealthy anyways, and something that puts others at risk.
61/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I don't support consumption sites. People aren't going to take transit to come here to get high, they will do it outside their homes. This site is next to a soccer field and park and a church in the heart of the community and don't support this in Calgary Concern would be the concentration of people given that there are only 3 sites available. More sites should be considered. Also concerned with littering of butts. This site is close to a walking path used by families on thei way to the playground or to play in the field. This location is too close to where kids play regularly. This hill is used for family concerts supported by the city. This location is too close to a school, church, playground and soccer field. This area is totally unacceptable. One area doesn’t seem to be enough to satisfy the community need however. That’s a long walk for many people. More, less spread out âœareas― would be more convenient & help remove the stigma many obviously have. lots of seniors in this area would find it hard and it is very close in Inglewood which is also going to have one Yes. 2 blocks from a school and overlooks a playground, soccer field and sliding hill. That there are children using this space! Runners use the stairs right there for training, and there’s an offleash area for dogs. It’s wasteful to use this community space for this purpose.
Yes my children toboggan there in winter and I don’t want them exposed to drug smoke This area is often used by kids playing soccer, going to the park and tobaggonning. There has been significant crime in this area and CPS has communicated their concerns policing these parks which further compounds the current issue Yes, it's where my children play daily. It's a winter toboggan hill for families of the community, it's a gathering place for young families, it's where Langevin school kids play at lunch and after school. It's next to a children's park. BAD IDEA!!! 1) Proximity to school that uses this area daily for phys.ed and events 2) This area is used daily by children for tobogganing in the winter 3) This area will be avoided by local residents and children with an increase of transient populations using drugs "...carefully considered through criteria addressing the location’s accessibility, safety, and proximity to sensitive land uses such as schools, playgrounds, and residences." This location is next to all of these including 3 daycares. Children are at play often during the day. This is used as a tobogganing hill and gym/exercise area for local kids. Bridgeland and Crescent Heights have their fair share of social problems and challenges that suburban communities do not have. Are you also planning test sites in suburban communities and outer fringe areas such as Mount Royal, Elbow Park and Lakeview? Will cause disturbance to area
62/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
This area is used by families and children. It is used by nearby daycares and Langavin school children. The hill is used for sledding in the winter. Yes. It's currently used by children regularly and others enjoying sports, walking dogs, using the park and eating lunch or otherwise using the green space. This is an absurd idea to think this will not cause other issues. I live in the area and can guarantee you that this is a horrible consumption site. The proposed location is frequented by many families with small children and is in very close proximity to the Langevin school. I often see kids on their own there. Absolutely! Horrible location. With the wind predominantly coming form the West (or North) any wind will carry the smell to the community buildings and fields. It is also adjacent to the pathway system. The hill by children through the winter (toboggans) It is in close proximity to schools and a playground. No Why are you accommodating cannabis but not open alcohol containers? This park draws a lot of children all year round. In the summer, children play at the park and there are a lot of people that play sports in the fields. In the winter, it is a popular spot for tobaganning. There is a church and Langevan school close by. Yes the fact that it is in a community park. This is inappropriate given the all AHR community nature of the park. Only that there are not a sufficient amount of legal, public locations to consume, so it may draw a large crowd of outlying users out of a lack of legal consumption spots elsewhere in the city limits.
Why not make it a destination and try and create or revitalize a district. It's small and if we're going to do something we may as well do it right No There is a soccer field and playground AT Murdoch park - with children in the area much of the time. School children from Langevin walk on that pathway from Langevin school to Murdoch park many times during the school yr. This would be inappropriate. Perhaps the children playing on the field. Yes. This is a shared space used by soccer teams, families, used for community events, and close to a playground. If the designated area is pushed to the side of the park furthest from the playground it is too close to private residences It's close to a community field and playground, used by underage children on a regular basis. This a near a pathway used regularly by the young children. It is a common lunch area for langevin students, we use that hill for Tobagoning and daycare uses it for outdoor play very frequently. The kids love to roll down the hill in the summer. This is too close to spaces used by families
63/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
The most important thing to consider is that this area is near schools.... and houses with children in them. Enough said. it is right near a pathway, childern play in the area, on the hill, it is very near to the sport field and it is near a family friendly area and attraction - hmm seems to not meet the criteria laid out for where these proposed sites can go!!! Why isn't it legal everywhere? Serious. Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal eve There are a lot of family and neighborhood activities that happen here, such as soccer, a playground, community Center, and a farmers market. This isn't a good spot at all. There is a children's playground 400m away, schools nearby use the soccer field for P.E. classes and other sports leagues and kids groups use it too. The proposed site does not meet the critiera set up by The City. It is near a pathway, near a sports field, childern play in the area. I walk the pathway regularly and do not wish to be exposed to second hand smoke and the smell of cannibas. Far away from where I live There is a playground and tobogganing hill at Murdoch Park and there are lots of kids and young families that use this park. I live in an apartment building across the street and do not want the stench in my balcony or getting into my home. MANY issues you should with this proposed location. It is the main hub for families in Bridgeland. Any day one would see families in the park, kids playing soccer in the field, families sledding on the hill and kids from Langevin using the area for scho It is too close to Langevin School where kids are frequently doing neighborhood walks as it is a science school. On any given wintery snow day you will find many kids playing and toboganning in that park. Yes, Calgary needs to look at Edmontons model to implement the legalization of marijuana and consider the opportunity to normalize use alongside orher contolled substances. Yes there are schools, and a church there Need for increased security. Who's going to provide that? Is CPS going to have more officers there especially during the night when the site would typically be used? Legal liability for exposing people to second hand smoke and to youth under 25. Consuming and driving is very likely. I think designated parks are a horrible idea! Do you really think those who want to use pot will want to go to a designated area just to sit outside to use it? Give the stupid idea more thought before implementing pot parks!! Yes, this area is not the greatest at it is. Addi g a site lije will attract traffic and bad people. This hill is where kids play, run and toboggan. Also near my house
64/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 yes plenty. one that is very clear is the health of animals. bridgeland has lots of dogs. the area also devalues the cleanliness of an upcoming area. as calgarians we are proud of a safe and clean city. this will not help bridgand become a better place. Too close to kids. This is where kids go for tobogganing in winter. Bridgeland already has a large number of transient individuals causing problems and stealing from yards. Opening this centre would create a homeless population camp that is going to cause more problems for the community. We need more areas, not just in the SE and NE, how about the NW? Bowness for example? As if everyone in Bowness doesnt smoke weed already. the schools use the field near by for activities, I do not think that making this area a designated cannabis location is the right move. moreover, recently a permit for a dispensary only a block away was denied based on the proximity to the schools. This is one of the main access paths from downtown to the neighbourhood. My daughter (6 yrs) and I often either walk along the ridge (in front of the Lutheran church) or up the stairs. Already now often people sit on those steps/stairs and smoke. there are playgrounds and playing fields immediately adjacent to this area so is not appropriate
Not at all. Though one location is not enough. I don’t believe tobacco or cannabis should be smoked in any area where non-users or children are present This is a ridiculously terrible idea. How about kids being exposed to an area where a large number of people would be smoking? How about about people driving through Bridgeland stoned? My kids play in that park! Langevin School uses this pathway as their running track. The proposed location is the start line for the "Langevin Mile" races No It’s pretty close to homes and sports field. Ensure that of our will not be a concern for homeowners and participants based on distance from consumption It is a park. Designed for kids. I really don’t think we need drug consumption here. It violates the standards set out by the city. It is an area where childern play, it is close to the sports field, a church and within close proximity to residential homes Smoking in public around children and those with chronic diseases will negaticely effect the neighbourhood. You can’t drink alcohol outside, why can you get high? There are many festivals, sports, and other events held in and around this area. I don’t feel it is necessary or beneficial to set up a smoking area here. That 2nd hand smoke can led to others who do not choose to smoke it to feel the effects. It uses a green space that is frequented by children, people exercising and looking to get some fresh air.
65/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Very large public park. I do not want to breath in 2nd hand smoke Are you serious!?Maybe the open fields where kids soccer games take place, a community centre, AND playground within 100m..just in the map YOU provided above. Not to mention a school just north. Are you already started smoking pot when picking this site!? Yes. Where is the wine consumption park? Why do we need to have cannabis consumption areas and why would a user go there? How do you expect to enforce it and insure it doesn’t create an eyesore for the community? This location is heavily used for recreation purposes and is in close proximity to a park. The location is also along a pedestrian corridor used to access the c-train. This location will have a negative impact on these groups. why do you have to get high in public You’re idiots. What about children, what about property values? Safety. No lights. Just sweep the people that are going to use pot for therapeutic reasons. There is a church next door to this location, the polution of pot smoke needs to be considered to the parishiners of this church. There is also a sports field and community association. The use of marijuana does not promote an active lifestyle We do not need these sites any more than for responsible Alcohol consumption in parks. Tobacco and Cannabis are not equal. Alcohol and Cannabis are equal, both impair behaviour, driving, and judgement. Cannabis should not be allowed to be consumed in public areas There is already ongoing issues with homeless and riff raff in Bridgeland. Using this beautiful space for smoking and congregration is just about the worst idea I have ever heard of
No, great location This entire idea is ridiculous. No public spaces just like we don’t have public alcohol parks. people smoking pot at this location would make me excluded from using the area myself, I frequently go there very close to the exact spot of the smoking area. I have a breathing condition and am very sensitive to second hand smoke of any kind. Yes. Three daycares are within a 2 block radius. A school is 2-3 blocks away. The site is adjacent to a church and sits on a park, soccer field and playground. The city has an obligation to keep drugs away from children. A park that will be no longer useable for anyone else the site runs a farmers market one day a week in the summer, and has a playground, I don't think it's ok to mix cannabis and business and children I am concerned about the proximity to the playground, schools, community centre and pathways. Children, families, dogs all use this area and it will degrade the character of Bridgeland and make it less welcoming and desirable.
66/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I have seen kids playing by the field and playground nearby the proposed and the community hall host family friendly event from time to time. Cannabis smoke spreads a long way from point of use and is extremely potent and an irritant to many. Any outdoor use is inappropriate. It is close to a school, playground and church and may attract the homeless community known to frequent the area Location would attract homeless population which is already known to frequent the area. The hill adjacent to the proposed site is used by families in the winter for tobogganing, is adjacent to a public pathway and is directly beside a church. Just because it is out of the general purview of the public does not mean it is appropriate. YES. Butts everywhere, a stinky smoke haze, the fact we are trying to make this a family friendly neighborhood, people potentially smoking & driving, should be treated the same as alcohol, NOT encouraged outdoors where others walk who don't partake. Yes it’s a family community. Not a pot smoking junkies. The only people smoking pot on the street are junkies. The close proximatey of the church. Children and families may congregate in that area on sundayss the comment made on the radio that 'if consumption sites are harder to get too it will increase the risk of driving high' there is no exscuse for driving impaired Students of Langevin School regularly use this area for athletics and walk through the area on field study. It is therefore not a space that fits the criteria of being out of proximity of schools and children. Consumption should be restricted to the user's private property, not on public property. I have seen at this location suspicious activity and fear providing a consumption site will only increase this activity This is not an acceptable location. It is near schools, playgrounds, etc. We would never put an open drinking location in this spot for obvious reasons. Similarly it should be obvious we can't put a smoking location here. Please have some common sense. No public areas should be considered. Ensureing all area's equipped with waste receptacles and tamper-proof ashtrays. The idea of having smokers citywide congregating here is unreasonable. It's currently used by kids playing soccor, walkers and joggers. The route around our community park, enjoying the city view, will be cut off and inaccessible, without inhaling. Yes - there are kids around here all the time, thereby negating your own policies. Also, the needs and health of seniors should be taken into account - they don't need to breathe in second hand smoke either. I live here with children. Many families are here with children playing outside. This is bad
67/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Yes, physical exposure to second hand cannabis smoke. Jr High students use this space for their physical education classes quite frequently. Families with young children use this space a lot; COC recreational events held there Yes, this area is near a church and playground/soccer field with kids. We don’t want this in our community where kids play. Also, we fear this could amplify a negative behavior which already exists. People not disposing of butts properly, smoking and driving, attraction of fringe types to the neighborhood, the lingering stench that hangs for a long time, should be treated the same as alcohol as it has similar effects. Yes it’s a park used by kids and now will be littered and busy with pot smokers The big issue is ensuring public safety for the residents of Bridgeland. there is a playground and sports field about 100 feet away and a lot of children are in the area, could we limit the access of children to this area. In addition there is a lot of car traffic from the church parking lot that causes privacy concerns Open areas would promote under the influence driving public cannabis consumption is a terrible idea, we do not allow public alcohol consumption, why would we allow this?? This location is somewhat removed from local businesses see above and below comments 3 day cares within 2 blocks, a school a block away, a playground down the hill. It's a family area with dense populaton. Parking is at a premium already. It's a toboganning hill in the winter. Dogs are in the park, that is a concern. I don't want it . Yes, there is a church there, i walk my dog there every day in the off leash area, don't make bridgeland a drug area Yes, this area is frequented by children, dog walkers, runners, etc. During the winter months the area of full of children using the hill for toboganing. The proximity of the area to the Drop in Center is also concerning to me. no this is a great location for a cannabis park If this is approved on City owned land then how about allowing consumption of wine , beer even spirits on City Parkland. Definately-concern especially to families with young children. The proposed site in Bridgeland is the natural area where our children play, next to the toboggan hill and close to schools and playgrounds; where the Langevin school holds various activities See above. Cyclists are breathing heavily after cycling up the path and their health is also at risk. This area is also at the top of a long stairway from the lower part of the district. There is also a well used playground in the park. There are many families with children in this area, this area has so many issues with homeless and drug addiction already. This is an awful idea
68/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Open alcohol consumption should be allowed if openly consuming other intoxicants is allowed.
Ban the homeless There should be more Not seeing any major ones Yes, the hill above the proposed location that is frequently used by families with children for winter sledding. Yes there are, I think my environment could be affected in security and waste No, I think the area is a good location The smokers have already proven to be disgusting and irresponsible with their buts they throw them on the ground in front of my condo and in my community dog dish and there is a but container within 15 feet. Why do i have to trust the pot smokers now? Please take this site off of the proposed list. This location in bridgeland is way too close to the school and the community center. This is not a good choice. yea. that you need more locations. Please put one further northeast, such as prairie winds or forest lawn high field still close to a bike path, and park where children activities take place it has alot of kids in the park. it could create some influences for the kid. Due to a lack of sites in other communities, people may be commuting to use this site, increasing strain on parking, and potentially driving home while impaired. Also, tobogganing and community soccer at the adjacent field with children 2 and up. Consider winter and wind how can you light a cigarette on a windy day? Very difficulty, where are the sites in the north west this is a joke to have 3 consumption sites within the whole city of Calgary This area already has a high level of social disorder...many people drink alcohol here or hang out smoking on wooden stairs. More locations are needed so they are accessible to people What is the city’s liability and responsibility if there is an accident caused by someone who is driving home from a legalized city provided Pot Spot? How about an accidental fatality from someone driving while impaired How are these sites going to be monitored to ensure that only leagally purchased cannabis is used here, and prevent underage users, illegal street dealing, congregation of populations who already loiter, steal, vandalize leaving unwanted garbage Bridgeland is a very nice district area. The open green space with the the playground is good place for young families with small kids to play in and for seniors to do exercises. Please do not proceed with the proposed plan as it will riot the neigborhood
69/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
This has been a public park for decades intended for families and children. There is a school (which also uses this park) 3 blocks away. Being publically intoxicated is detrimental to both family values and sets a wrong example for young children. This is already a problem crime area in our neighborhood. I do not see how this would accommodate tourists or any residents in Bridgeland. The only benefit would be providing seating for the already undesirable criminal element in the area. Yes, it is very close to public soccer fields, play grounds, an ice rink, a church and local schools that do field trips in the area This immediate location is used by kids from langevin school and the neighborhood therefore I don’t feel it an appropriate location. Our daughter regularly plays in the field and the playground and walks in this area. It is already a popular spot for a handful of homeless Calgarians, so it may be worth considering more frequent police patrols at first to see if this becomes an issue. Also consider that people may not bother to walk over to a designated area. All the locations discussed should be under video surveillance and monitored regularly to reduce crime and behavioral issues. Will parking be enforced to reduce congestion and reduce the risk of driving under the influence of drugs. Safety for kids. Having a group of potheads all puffing away in one area, the kids would just need to walk in that area to be affected. Let's see how the crime rate goes up in any areas these drug using sites will be set up. This area already has high crime and high transient population and is close to where kids use the park and walk to school. None None this is my opinion for all the locations but this in particular - this doesn't make any sense, treat cannabis like liquor, we can't drink our favorite Pinot Noirs in parks Get more locations please near MacLeod or close to Crain Murdoch Park is the heart of the community of Bridgeland...couldn’t have picked a worse location. Most concentrated area with children in the whole neighborhood. Close to elementary school. In winter the hill here is loaded with kids tobogganing. All these are in low income areas that will become heavily stigmatized. How about some upscale solutions? Blatant prejudice against poor people. One has to be a home owner to smoke pot isn't going to diminish the black market. No, that looks fine. the terrible smell for residents in the surrounding area Whose building is that? School or Comm. Centre? Nice location but once again no seating area.
70/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Potential for it to become a breeding ground for illegal activities, such as other drug use and dealing. No The area is used by children's sports teams, families who toboggan and skate and the children's cottage is just a block away and Langevin school. I don’t like the idea of there being this place at all, as it is in a area with alot of problems already, adding this would only add more problems. It is also in an area where there is a public park where lots of children play and that could be a problem yes - it is directly adjacent to a toboggan hill, soccer fields and playground area - very arrogant of city council It is close to a sports field, a pathway, church and residential homes, I don't believe that meets the City standards. It is an area that families with children use, it is used by schools, kids have to walk the pathway to the field. safety of the area Pot smoking should not be in designated areas but should be treated like smoking and alcohol consumption. It fails every criteria the city has set forth for proposed "pot gardens". Kids, schools, playgrounds. It's also a hotbed for encampments and illegal drug use. Things our councillor would know if he spent 5 minutes here. Alergic persons like me cannot stand the odor from cannabis, we suffer headaches, even migranes. I don't think it is a major issue, but ensuring that consumers know that it is the west end of the park and not the east end near the playground. This location is not a wise choice. It is close to Langevin school and the Community Association where children are playing at the park and in the green space. Children shouldn't be exposed to marijuana smoke and smell close to where they play and learn Winter? Some shelter would be nice for those using the area year round. It is a very open area so having enough lights would be important to maintain safety. Langevin Elementary and Junior high school is right around the corner. I have 2 small kids who attend and they utilize that park regularly. They are a science school dedicated to exploring nature, not second hand smoke. They cross directly through there. The danger it brings to residences in the area close to zoo and low income housing are people safe and or harmed by the smoke? People with alergic reactions suffering just for this ?
1. This location is at the top of a very popular sledding hill in the winter. 2. It lies along the route that kids use to and from the Langevin School. 3. The Langevin School very often uses this park for outdoor gym classes. Abuse of space, increase in negative behaviour, many children in this area could be potentially negatively influenced
71/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It’s a park with children in it There are enough homeless people in the area as is, this will increase with the proposed designation for cannabis i think this is too close to schools. there is already an issue with drugs (selling and consuming) in this area and we dont need to add to it. bridgeland is trying to clean up the area and this wont help. This is completely unreasonable and frankly laughable to expect every cannabis user in a city like calgary to congregate in only THREE areas. i am willing to bet you be unable to enforce this whatsoever. Proximity to children. This location is way too close to playgrounds, schools, daycares, and churches. This location is right next to a park that is filled with kids on a daily basis. In addition, there is a large marginalized community fairly close to the area that would not benefit by having this available. We don't allow alcohol or smoking cigarettes consumption parks. So why allow cannabis. Major liability issues as how does one get back home. Please have common sense and allow nothing. Keep a park a park for everyone to enjoy. No one is gonna go to a park just to smoke, we'd smoke on the way none that I can think of This proposed location already has an influx of people loitering in the community and providing unsafe areas. I think having this location as a proposed site is only going to harm the community instead of providing a positive experience. The location is smack in the middle of public spaces that intersect there, such as the community garden, a church, a daycare, a toboggan hill and ampitheatre, an offleash dog park, and a public pathway. Way to try to put all the cannabis users on display. - the distance from many suburbs - stand outside in all types of weather - feeling stigmatized - far more restrictive than Provincial regulation It is overlooking a park and playing field frequented by children and youth. It is also in close proximity to Langevin school. We feel the distance of 150 metres from a school is still too close.
I use that pathway system regularly and I do NOT want to inhale any second hand smoke whether from cigarettes or cannabis There are children playing in this area and pot is a carcinogenic like tobacco. I would never expose my children to this site as pot stays in the air much worse than regular tobacco. There are children at this park. I don't think it would be good to have public cannabis use here. We wouldn't have open liquor legalized in the park, why should we have open use of cannabis? there should be no consumption sites
72/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
There are families that frequent this park. Public cannabis use could attract undesirable traffic. We do not allow liquor in parks. Why allow cannabis? This is a primary area used by Langevin school. Both as a walking area between the school and Thom Campbell hill and the soccer field. Yes. Treat pot smokers like any other smokers. No smoking in public places. If they need to smoke build special room just like at the airports. I don’t want to smell it walking in parks with my kids How do people get to this site unless walking? Draw all kinds of undesirable people to the area including people doing harder drugs. Drugs are positively correlated with increase in Crime which is close to a secondary school and children’s play areas. Lots of children in area playing; very popular park That the entire park would suffer. This park is well used and I wouldn’t want to see that change because of a lot of people smoking pot The proximity to long term care center concerns me. Also I feel that we are already inundated with issues crime , etc due to our proximity to the drop in center. Devaluating residental property values, comsumption is a deterant to using the park for recreational activites. YES!! Langevin School students utilize the green spaces and walk zones to get to and from field studies and educational programs. This would NOT be a wise location. The proposed area is a natural site used by families, close to schools and daycare, as well as a playground and a sports field. It also close to residential homes. It is a know problem area for drugs and theft Park at that location is extremely popular for young children sledding during winter time, and sports during summer. Marijuana has detrimental effects on development and should not be used near children at any time. There is a playground, ice rink, soccer field and taboggin hill all within that park. Cannabis should not be near those facilities This is an area that is used by children and families as a toboggan hill, play area and is adjacent to a soccer field, playground and Community Hall. Lots of families here. YES! It's a bad location given its proximity to playgrounds, schools, and the drop-in centre where people are already battling with other substance abuse. It's like putting in a bar beside an alcoholics home. Leisure use has mind altering potential too! It's access to a public park, utilized by countless children and their families. Residents of this area have long battled the illegal consumption of alcohol in the vicinity. Why add to the problem?
73/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
There are a HUGE number of people who walk through and by this area before and after work, or at other times to utilize the C-train station. This is NOT a quiet unused area of Calgary. There’s th Children’s Society south of this....within 300m It is too close to Langevin school where children frequently go after school hours and sometimes even during school. Also there is a soccer yard and playground not far away. The wind will also carry the smell throughout the area. No There doesn't seem like a solid plan to monitor the boundaries and tidiness of this area. It is set within a larger, family use park and pathways used by all ages. My concern is that signage alone won't keep the cannabis use within set boundaries. Yes! Its right beside a park that is frequently used by children and families walking their dogs, playing sports etc. Parents are not going to want their children in proximity to a cannabis consumption area. This is a terrible location choice! Will this attract an unsavory element? Individuals with mental health issues who consume may pose a risk to the community. Please see comments below. yes I believe it is to close to a children's play area and a secondary school. The area is isolated with poor street access. As part of the park this area is already being used as a tobogganing hill, picnic area,kite flying area Murdoch Park is the hub of our community...location of outdoor festivals in the summer, children's soccer games, the weekly Bridgeland Farmer’s Market, the most populated area of children playing. not school plays in the green space less then 100 meters away from the proposed area we run through there everyday and even though it is not a designated off leash park you would be hard pressed to find a day in warm weather where it isn't being used as1 This park is used by students from the nearby Langevin school and by people playing with their children during the summer. During the winter when covered with snow, I believe the slope next to the designated site is used by children for sliding. Yes don’t put it there I am concerned about the disgusting smell of marijuana wafting through this large public space, detracting from the experience of many to suit the needs of a few. I am concerned if this will also increase the transient population issues of the area. It is on a pathway entrance to a park with a playground. The location is a tobogganing hill in the winter. Langevin school students use this pathway to access the field for Phys Ed. There is a residence 32 meters from this site. This location is a frequently used toboggan hill for young children, and the area that Langevin youth are brought for gym classes - such close proximity to cannabis consumption is a bad idea.
74/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
The only issue is the negative mindset of the residents in the neighbourhood. I think this is a great idea and that some / a lot of people need to be educated on the benefits and how they can outweigh their concerns. Yes, it would stink and it is totally unnecessary. Also, underage people can go there and purchase it with no monitoring. We don't allow that with cigarettes even. This area is frequented by children and their families, and is near many residents. Would only accommodate the homeless, criminals, to gather. Eliminate one more of our precious green spaces for family use. I am concerned about the playground, soccer field, bike path and rec area for children and families being so close. Yes. You can’t drink alcohol outside in public parks, so weed should be the same. There are children and people who live in the direct area who would not appreciate people hanging around getting wasted in their neighbourhood, why not in front of city hall 3 days care, a playground, a school all within 2 blocks. Site used by children and people and their pets. Parking is an issue already. increase garbage. Garbage left by smokers now is an issue. The amount of issues the area has with crime and losers up to no good.., why give an invite to hang out and get f’d up.., its ridiculous this idea is even considered, you can’t hang out and drink booze all day in EuClaire market.., There is already a shortage of police, especially in this area in regards to the amount of issues to be dealt with. This will only add to the issues and we all know there won’t be enough police to address the increase in new issues associated INADEQUATE SPACE TO COMMENT! The proposed space violates ALL of the rules the city has imposed for these proposed locations. And unfortunately for our community, our "councilor" is blissfully unaware of this and the markedly increased crime in our area. Unless the city is going to allocate regular clean up crews to monitor the site, there will be considerable waste added to the park area. The park is regularly littered with trash and waste, and people regularly smoke along the benches. Any form of consumption will leave excess waste.
I think that there should be proposed areas in each neighborhood of the city. At least 2 per ward all rolled out together. Certain areas shouldn't be benefitted or hindered (depending on how one sees the issue) by being the only ones to have designated sites. Children regularly play in the parks nearby and walk from their homes to get there, this area of Bridgeland is an epicentre of activity for the young (there is a daycare on mcdougall, there is a park where children play, soccer happens in the greenspace). The smell and how it will waft into peoples homes. Safety, which is already a bit of a concern in Bridgeland. Noise, especially late at night, again already a concern and this will make it worse.
75/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Take into consideration the demographic of the community. Every time I visit Bridgeland the park consistently has young families or children playing in the field or on the playground nearby. The weekly farmers market would also be negatively affected and it would deter people from visiting.
Lots of issues with this! I am strongly appears to having a designated area for this as this is discrimination to another people’s needs! If they want to smoke rent a place that allows it! If you are going to treat them special then what about a place to, bbq, ride horses, off road with dirt bikes,
Yes, there’s a park and playground where children play and also a shelter close by. If this pot spot is placed here, it’ll attract more homeless and other weed smokers and increase the number of break-ins in the area. the proposed location is often on the route of langevin school children doing field trips in the bridgeland area. The location is inappropriate, it is a sports and family area. It is an area used by schools and other youth groups. It is near a pathway where people walk with their families and pets. It is also rather close to homes, what impact will it have on their property value? If you don't let people drink or smoke in public, then why would you let people smoke pot in public. Cannabis should be consumed in private areas only. No need to promote something not healthy for the lungs to younger generations. It is a family friendly soccer field. Touching an offleash area. Directly beside the Bridgeland market. Beside 3 churches and you can see a school from the field. Clearly it was not planned. I will be going around the community notifying all residents of the proposed cannabis smoking area. the park is rented out for various of community functions and groups. City would lose money not having it available. also the community hall rents the space to many weddings. I can’t see it being attractive location if this became a cannabis consumption area! Close proximity to schools, a heavily used community center , field and playground. People walk there pets in this area, so there is a concern with dropped cannabis. As well as the high crime level of the area, not that I think the people using this will be the problem, it could just add to it this is the sight of the old General hospital. It’s not appropriate to have a cannabis consumption on it’s property. This space is also frequently used for soccer games and families enjoying the outdoor space. The proposed location is situated near a passageway used by residents, students and park users. It is very close to a sledding hill used in the winter. It is currently being used, on occasion, by loiterers to consume alcohol, often in small groups. This proposal would exacerbate an existing problem.
76/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I was lost for words when I saw the information board about a proposed weed smoking sanctuary at my favourite park in Bridgeland. Is the most pressing issue we face as a city to provide safe refuge for weed? And your best idea for location is to put that refuge in a Park???
Yes. We have an enormous drug problem with junkies setting up camp right where the proposed spot is. While I realize pot smokers are not the same why add open pot use to this area? It seems unintelligent and like there was no thought given to current issues in the community.
Stigma - overall impression of the community No I don't want to sound unprofessional-but this has to be the silliest idea that has come out of City council in some time.Not to mention this is a park used by families with children so it is a totally inappropriate site if in fact it was something that was really needed by Calgarians - whichitis not
It looks fine. The location seemingly makes sense if you are to create a sort of highschool style †œsmoke pit― for voting age adults, but the concept altogether seems a little,dare I say, restrictive & possibly even juvenile. Who knows though, perhaps this is the social experiment in which neighbours become friends
This park is actively used by the community, the students of Langevin school, the youth soccer program coordinated by the BRCA, etc. The proposed location is right next to a pathway that many people use to move through the community and should not become an area for indivuals to smoke pot.
Very close to the soccer field and walking pathway. Should not be in front of young people that play in the area. Why so close to parking? Would this encourage driving under the influence?
Forcing a PUBLIC space to be designated preferentially for certain citizens who decide to engage in smoking marijuana. I see this as similar to having certain parks designated for heterosexuals [bad data transfer] in certain areas. It is close to an area where people loiter already and needles are consistently found. It is not well lit. Legal is one thing but wholesome is another and this is not a wholesome proposal in my opinion. Very near toboggan hill and within a couple blocks of a school are also issues.
Yes, there are kids everywhere from this community of Bridgeland. It's a play park and a soccer field. In the winter time, the community children use this location of Murdoch Park for sledding. This location is used by children and youth of Bridgeland for both winter and summer activities.
77/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Yes. The area already has known drug problems and this will promote more. Also will people drive to these locations and then drive after smoking cannabis. This whole idea is bad for Calgary. no This site is a site that is currently being used by young families and others that are opposed to the park being used as a site to smoke cannabis. Many. This is a public park that is heavily used by families/children. It is not an appropriate site for such a location. Additionally, most members of the community are opposed to the idea.
This is a common kids play areas. This is the exact spot where I took my son to learn to ride his bike for the first time last weekend. It is also where I regularly take the kids tobogganing. Plus it is one of the areas that the Langevin Science School students use for their field trips
It is close to a school, multiple parks and the community center. This is a place where children play! That is primarily our toboggan hill that we meet friends during the winter and near the bike path we use to the playground. Langevin school students use the park during school hours as well as daycare kids walking back to daycare from school in that area.
How in the world can you think this location is a good idea...?! I'm baffled this area was selected.
Right next to a church!?! One block of a children's school?! Very close to the Di where drugs are already a problem - this will shift it over from Memorial drive. Really bad location.
There is a lot of foot traffic here as well as this is used as a tobogganing are by children in the winter Not issues, just more comments. I understand that families in the community feel like they own the park, but they don't. It's a public space which means that people who DON'T have families/children use it, too, and it would be wrong to disregard those peoples' right to use outdoor greenspaces.
This is a well used area by children(summer and winter), school athletics, and many sports teams of all ages. The church also has Sunday school classes that use the outdoor space weather permitting. Not an appropriate spot. Perhaps the birdhouse trees under the 4th street flyover.
Yes, people including children use that part of the path to walk in evenings with families and pets. I am allergic to cannabis, and for me, i walk there 4 times a day with my dog, we have a rutine, hence why I bought in the condos across the park, so i would be close to home and it would be safe
78/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
There are significant issues, including the large number of young people (under 16) who use this park daily for sport and recreation. Langevin Elementary School uses this park regularly during the school year. The park promotes health and fitness and should NOT have a consumption site on it.
It is a prohibited from use by this purpose by the bylaw that creates the rules for public sites
I say no, Yes! This is a park used by many people, it's extremely popular. This is a toboganning hill in the winter, in the summer it's right next to what has to be one of the busiest soccer fields in the city. There are kids everywhere! This makes NO sense. And there are residences right beside it.
It would be appreciated if it could be a beautified space: street art, clean sitting areas, well kept grass... this would help reduce the stigma associated with cannabis today and would hopefully lead those using the space to be respectful of the area. Children! Everywhere! This is a toboggan hill! Right next to a super busy soccer field! There is a school not far away. There are residences right beside it, and it is a gateway to the community center park, with a large playground! This is right along a pathway used by all residents including children. It is also at the top of the tobaggan hill which is the primary gathering spot for the neighbourhood in the winter months.
The proximity to the Drop-In Centre is a serious red flag. Bridgeland has enough problems without adding more stress on this lovely neighbourhood. It has to deal with high crime rates and other societal issues. If you must have these sites, why choose areas with these problems?
Yes, it’s beside a toboggan hill, running stairs, bike and walking path. No I believe this looks good. You are sacrificing community resident's right to fresh air for the sake of profiting off cannibis sales. Not as far as I can tell. Many. This area is a mix used area - in the daytime, there are families playing during the day (tobaggan hill, Langevin school uses it as their gym space etc), and unfortunately, in the PM, it turns dark -folks regularly using needles, fornicating, screaming, drinking, fighting, causing havoc.
The area is likely to attract more people who use the services of the Drop In Centre across the river...actually bringing them into a residential area and into a green space adjacent to a children’s play area... in my opinion this would not be a wise decision.
79/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
There is already so much crime in this area with drug deals, car break ins, parkade break ins, and violence happening almost daily. If you check out the community groups on Facebook, there are too many incidents to mention and they would increase substantially with further encouragement of drug use.
The community association nearby runs soccer programs for young children, this location is on a pathway that is a direct link to the park, field and community association. It is also still quite close to a school (Langevin). It should be noted that it is a elevated location which is a positive.
Yes. It congregates people and has the potential to stigmatize users of cannabis and the neighbourhood. This is a family-oriented area where everyone from small children to seniors should feel free to play and walk. I'm concerned having a consumption area there could create a vibe that would intimidate the people that want to walk and play there, making Bridgelanders feel unwelcome in their 'hood.
Yes, with all proposed locations. Pot and alcohol need to be treated as equals, no consumption in public areas period. Breathalyzers have also been extended to pot... there need to be consistentcy between the 2 It’s not! This is the pathway for me and my family from Riverside up to Bridgeland bay we take daily and the path for my child going to school. This is also the toboggan hill we use all the time in the winter. I strongly oppose this area due to it's proximity to children and pets. This location is immediately beside the soccer field and off-leash dog park. It is only ~200 metres away from a playground and community centre. I am deeply concerned about the safety of our community and the potential for harm.
Schools, daycares and surrounding condos have young family with kids. The green space is used as kids' activities in summer. Totally a disaster if set up as a public consumption area. This area does not meet the city’s standards for a consumption area. It is near a recreational field, the full green space is used by families and schools. It is right along the pathway where I walk my dog nightly - the smell is off putting. I have concerns about who will use the area there are stairs right there going down to lower bridgeland. not sure if people that walk to work would appreciate being greeted by 'high' individuals, or the smell. There should not be designated consumption sites. Yes, it’s one block from Langevin School (K-9) and the park is used regularly by the students and for community soccer and other kids leagues & activities. You should consider that Bridgeland already has vagrants, encampment and crime. This will further add to the problems we already have.
80/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
There is enough issues with alcohol/drug abuse by a demographic who migrate from the east end of the core/east village. The situation should not be perpetuated until the current social issue is corrected. We (society) not condone public drinking, this type of intoxication is no different.
Yes, its very location on a well-used park and close to a popular sledding slope. What were you thinking? Certainly not about the neighbourhood kids. Next to a busy mixed faith church used daily by many denominations. The area immediately next to the site is programmed year round by various cultural groups. Also used as an athletic field by students of the Langevin School as well as for profit fitness groups. It's a thorough fare for pedestrians.
The whole concept of designating 4 city parks for dope smokers is ludicrous. If a similar approach was taken with alcohol consumption, there would be a riot. Look at other jurisdictions like Amsterdam and consider a similar cafe style approach. Consider applying the general smoking policy to this.
*Too near (& between) school & playground, & at the SW access point to the park, adjacent to off leash, soccer field, & a busy toboggan hill in winter *Only a seasonal solution at best *Until majority of residential neighborhoods designate areas, these few would become a magnet for related problems
This location is just to close to a soccer field where there are several activities with young children. Spread of smoke in any amount is a real poissibity and therefore should not be allowed in this park.
Serdddderft hey hey hey
This area does have a lot of kids who use it to tabogan in winter, however there are already people who sit up here and drink and smoke. No there should be no public consumption allowed. Just like alcohol this should not be allowed publicly. I do not want my kids to see public consumption of pot or alcohol. Neither is acceptable publicly. None that I can think of Very busy park. Many people around- second hand smoke is unwanted. Please do not put this here- I bring my children Its 2 blocks from Langevin school! I have serious concerns for my 2 children and their friends who play in that park nearly every day. Yes A huge issue !!! Close to park where kids play
81/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
1. This is an area that is used extensively by children in our neighbourhood during the winter (tobogganing) and summer (bike riding, soccer.) 2. It is an area that is used by Langevin school for outdoor phys ed activities and for kids to eat lunch. 3. It is right next to a running/biking pathway. the fact that it is in a family used area is a huge issue. It so close to homes and a church. Schools use the facility. it is right near a pathyway. Why only this ward? why not in some other area such as Roxboro? Capital Hill? It is a park highly used by children throughout the year (both day and evening). Also, Langevin School uses Murdoch Park for Phys Ed classes and has many field studies which use the walking corridor directly past the proposed location. The location is too close to a heavily used playground.
It is far too close to the family park. Loved the family atmosphere in the area. Now disgusted by this use of area that will degrade the area. We value family values not the encouragement of drug use. This is one of my favorite places to walk my dog and sit on nice days. Once this goes in I will not be doing that any more. This is too close to a park where children play, not to mention all the dogs that walk by and could pick up a disposed joint. Please please find a less busy area to put this
Nope There are several, really open your eyes, these people are doing whatever they want already - you need to deal with what's occurring before just giving them permission for a free for all in public. A designated area unmonitored ... just like dog parks will not be respected. Do you have children?
This is a very high traffic area for people walking dogs. I think it is a very dangerous place for a concentrated consumption site. As it is there are many individuals who litter and leave their garbage around, cigarette butts etc. Cannabis, even in small amts can be toxic for dogs
It’s too close to the park where many residents like to enjoy a breath of fresh air without smelling cannabis on a regular basis. It may also attract the wrong crowd into a very precious area in Bridgeland so cherished by residents and other Calgarians. rowdiness, illegal sale of drugs, loud partying disturbing neighbors, decline in property values
The LOCATION. We want to revitalize our community area, not discourage families and kids from using the park. This is where we have our farmers' market, where kids play soccer. Think about how parents would want their kids to use this area now. Over 50% of households in the area have kids.
82/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Too close to playground and possibly the closest area to homeless shelter...so tons of stoned homeless people near playground?!!! Site is close to Langevin elementary -Jr high school! part of a toboggan hill and sports park used by children, and BRCA playground. Bridgeland already has a problem with drug dealers and vagrants - this location could lure dealers. Close to a free parking zone - what about post smoking drivers?
Why would you propose this? What makes smoking pot any different than smoking cigarettes or drinking alcohol in public? The neighbourhood already has drug and alcohol related issues, theft, vagrants etc. I feel this would add to the strain of our area. No, but I feel the Piazza would be a good location to consider a public consumption area. There are already ash trays in the seating area so it is already set up for it. Again you are assuming the project will go ahead which is again a leading question. Who designed this questionaire. But the area is used by children in the winter to toboggan and sled, and do we really want people driving to this location smoking pot and then driving home through the community.
Yes, the location fails every requirement that the city has proposed by way of proximity to children's play areas, etc. You need to be asking about why there's an issue with all pot parks, not just this specific location. BRIDGELAND DOES NOT WANT A POT PARK. There is a school within walking distance from there. Many kids walk across the park everyday after school. I have concern it could influence the school kid. signage? for those who are walking or playing in the area. What will happen to vagrants or people that overstay their welcome for the intended use of the area? Home owners, how to get there without a dui? What are we going to do there? We don’t need a buddy bench we need lounges Yes, Many children frequent the area, need any more be said? This located is under 300 metres from Langevin School and less than 200 metres from a heavily used playground. I realize this meets the LUB, but it doesn't mean it's suitable. The hill in Murdoch Park, directly east of 7A St NE, is used by young families during the winter season for tobogganing.
It's close to a school, it's a the top of a popular toboggan hill for neighbourhood children. It's on the pathway between these 2 things as well. It's in a park space in an area that is used by children daily. My kids toboggan within feet of this space and they walk past it as school groups walking from school to the soccer field, the Calgary Zoo, Telus Spark, Tom Campbell Hill, St Patricks Island, etc. It's right beside the pathway.
This location is right is near a church and also a play area (toboggan hill, soccer field and playground). Not recommended at all!
83/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Yes, there are plenty of family activities and sports that occur in this park. It is an inappropriate space for this activity and I believe that it will harm the park. I love living in the inner city, but I don't live here for drugs and partying. I don't want my kids or clients exposed to the stench of weed in the air. This area is heavily used by children and families. In the winter is is always very crowded with kids as it is a popular sledding hill. The students from Langevin school walk through that area to use the soccer fields all the time. Families play in the hill and fields. Not an appropriate spot!!! i like the proposed location The location seems to be counter to the standards set out by the city. Doesn't make sense that this location was selected. Was there any consideration given to the use of the green space? If I was the owners of the residence a mere stones throw from the proposed area I would be very concerned
It's at the entrance to the park. The 8-14 yr olds from the Langevin school pass right past here to and from their sports classes. Parking; policing, tobogganing in the winter from the exact same spot. Fire hazard on the slope in the summer. This is a heavily used area for a mixture of physical activities. A smoking area is completely contrary to the intended usage of the area. Add to this the element of potential unwelcome commentary from 'smokers' to people playing organized sports. It is within close proximity of my house and it will most definitely hinder any chances of selling in the future This is a very popular area for people and families and animals to walk. Most frequently used in the winter for families to sled. The smell of cannabis is very strong and irritating to many people including myself. The only way this would be remotely acceptable is if there is permanent CPS present.
This is a family used park and pot use coupled with crime and homelessness in the area will negatively affect the community The suggested spot is close to local schools who use the field regularly. The park is the crown jewel of the community and is currently well used by families and people with pets. A designated area will become a sore spot for the community and deter use of the park. Property values will decrease.
-School nearby who uses field -how will limiting consumption to the "designated area" be enforced so that the whole does not suddenly become a drug and cannabis usage area? -property values in the area will decrease -public use of the park will decrease (sports, family usage and pet owner usage)
Allowing smoking in a park meant for exercise, kids activities, community interactivity, is an awful precedent.
84/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
-close to the drop in centre -will become not just a designated cannabis usage area but drug usage overall' -users of edibles will not go to designated areas -how will the enforcement of usage only in the designated areas be enforced?
-too central in the community (at the park which is the "crown jewel" of Bridgeland and used by many people and children. -children use the hill which is right next to the proposed area -property values in the area will be hurt -too close to the main area/street in Bridgeland (ie. Centre Ave)
Reduced property values for entire community with increased risk of cannabis abuse and may lead to other dangerous substance abuse, proximity to Drop In Shelter downtown already invites people with alcohol abuse into neighborhood; permitted public cannabis space only increases the risk & danger
The use of the park is typically families with small children and dog owners. There is already a number of incidents involving drug use in this neighborhood, and a lot of effort and time has been put into "cleaning up" the area. I would hate to see a shift backwards. Oh so many! This park is the hub of neighborhood activities...family walks, children’s sports (soccer), a very well utilized playground, farmer’s market, community festivals, pancake breakfast during Stampede, tobogganing, dog walking, tool library, meetings, etc. I could go on and on...
The park is attached the the community center, a park where children are playing and is literally 2 blocks from a school. The homeless that collect themselves on Edmonton trail will end up coming to these parks in search of leftover bits and will make evening outings near impossible to do safely
Yes. This area always has children playing around and is right beside a church. There are always countless of homeless and individuals in this area and I don’t want an increase of those individuals hanging around as I have had issues with break ins and theft. The area is very residential and family oriented for the most part. The proposed location seems hidden and this area has lot of foot traffic already from the Calgary drop in centre. After extensively redevelopment this area into a family friendly area, why would you add this here? Look at photos from Google Maps = https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Murdoch+Park/@51.0516695,- 114.0423205,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m8!1e2!3m6!1sAF1QipMJsRAmE3mcvs3zSjO1ChLNrGdGgfyLx nOU
Close to a playground, people crossing through to get to the pathway and c train People from all over the city will be flocking to the parks proposed from other areas which concerns me regarding driving while under the influence. this is too close to drop in centre and one should expect crime would go up in the area
85/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
1) proximity to a school - Langevin students pass here on their way to outdoor programs & use park for phys-ed class/sports 2) children from nearby daycares use pathway 3) children toboggan here in winter. 4) butt debris - dirty & hazard to dogs 5) social disorder alreadycommon around 7A St stairs
I believe it to be too close to recreational and park proximity. Close proximity to the area Day Care, kids soccer field its a public park please stop offering public parks for cannabis and allow a limited number of bars or coffee shops to be specially designated to smoke pot create a special permit with a limit on how many can be operated otherewise let people smoke in their back yards. PUBLIC HEALTH, ANNOYANCE Proximity to drop in shelter How does this proposal support the City of Calgary Imagine Parks statement Make people a priority. These spaces provide opportunities for rest and relaxation, social interaction. If this proposal went ahead I would be prevented from all of the above - cannabis smoke lofts/carries
It is an intense residential area with a playground in the middle of the park. Safety issues, extra traffic. It is in no way a positive addition to this neighbourhood. As a resident in the area I am very much against having it there. It will also likely have a negative impact on property values.
The signage notifying resident of this proposal is insufficient. I had to "find it" There should be signage at least 3 locations around the park area consider the effect on health (asthma and other breathing related issues) and brain development of young children that pass by daily and use the Park's paths and field as part of a nearby schools outdoor ed program. Also the poor example being set for young people walking and playing in the area.
This is a common winter sledding area in the winter for many families with children. I think a better location would be the drainage rose garden at the SE corner of Murdoch park. There are playgrounds, a park, and a community center nearby. Events are routinely held here and there are frequently children in the area. This is not an acceptable place for cannibis consumption. Please rethink this idea before it destroys the neighborhood. I have issues with ANY proposed public space for the consumption of cannabis. Do we allow alcohol consumption in the parks? We need cannabis lounges for the recreational consumption of cannabis, away from parks and children. Our children play soccer in this park!
The population of Bridgeland/Riverside is increasingly made up of young families. This location, although close to condos, is also adjacent to the sledding area used extensively by children in the winter. It is along the path used by many kids to walk to school and also after care at Wee Wild Ones
86/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
FAR AWAY FROM WHERE RESIDENTS LIVE AND PLAY. The area is way to close to a public walking trails in our parkland. I would feel Uncomfortable on my daily walks walking but this site. There are are also 2-3 childcare facilities and day homes That use this trail also daily with baby carriages. I think the city could choose some other site.
This site would result in a disproportionate concentration of cannabis users DRIVING in Bridgeland. Departing, they would almost certainly drive through a school zone or playground zone. If each community has a public use area, users could walk to one in their own neighborhood, reducing the risk.
Yes, let's not have public cannabis consumption areas and especially not in green areas. Schools, playgrounds and playing fields within yards to the proposed cannabis consumption areas. The location is on a path that school children use daily. 1. Beside a church 2. Winter activity area for children as well as it being right beside the main park where adult & children’s sports activities are being played. 3. Residential buildings beside & close by where smoke can cause allergic reactions 4. Events are planned there.
The location is right next to the football ground, the kids play ground and the community centre. Also only 3 minutes away from Langevin school. Don't want kids to see the grown-up smoking, and be familiar with the smell of it. access to transit. This location is extremely close to a playground and park where young children play soccer. Children often learn to ride bikes in that area and there are 3 daycares and multiple schools near by. The daycares also use that route for their daily walks with the children. It is at the top of a tobogganing hill and soccer fields, in a park near a playground, with a community ice rink, beside a church, all of which are used by families and children. It is on a pathway used by children to get to school and for their outdoor phys.ed. class and for people to walk to work.
Not allow consumption of a drug in public. The park will become unusable for families, nonsmokers, asthmatics, and children. Why should neighbours be subjected to the smell, mess, noise and unwanted extra traffic.People become intoxicated and very undesirable. Those people bordering parks did not buy homes to have these problems.
87/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
This is very close to a school, and the school uses the park for some Physical Education events. This is also a site used for sledding for local children. There are some problems with undesirables in the area (public drinking, vandalism, hard drug use) - this will only make matters worse.
People have health issues where the smell of cannabis may cause nausea/vomiting. Also Unpleasant smell may lead to dizziness which isn't good in some individuals. This is a terrible location. It is at the top of a tobogganing hill used by many children and in the path of the route students at Langevin School use to access Murdoch Park. The park is used by many families and community groups who use the parking on 7A Street, right next to the proposed pot spot
The site does not compile with the standards set by the city. It is clearly in a greenspace that families and schools use. It is right next to a pathway where I and our friends walk out dogs. We would be subjected to the smell of cannabis. How is it a good location? As parents and Bridgeland residents, we are deeply concerned about the proposed existence of such a site in our community, especially given its proximity to the park and playground. It is less than 100m to a park used by kids and youth. I think we need more locations and more councillors should be making it their objective to find suitable places for Calgarian and tourists to smoke. Those who live in condos and apartments or in rented homes without permission to smoke would highly benefit from having places within walking distance.
This is an inappropriate area for a consumption site. There is a school a block or two away.. The playground is very close by and this is a greenspace used by the community for recreational activity space regularly (it is a toboganning area in winter) and kids frequent this area.
The fact that this is located in a park that is a focal point in the community is a concern. This area is not only utilized as a playground for both children and adults alike but it is also the location of the community center where numerous activities take place An entire trickle effect. Increased migration of homeless population, pollution. Decreased safety & comfort level. Low-exposed area with playground and children nearby & single women. Now have a condensed population of those with potentially impaired judgement. How is it monitored? At what cost?
I don't know. This area is within meters of child care centres, schools, fields that children use all day and all year. Policing the access by minors may be a challenge. The amenities at Murdoch Park are used daily by the community including children playing sports, etc!
88/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Yes! Driving to/from the location, and setting aside a community area that would then cater to one particular group. Why aren't we treating cannabis consumption the way we approach liquor consumption? There are no parks set aside for drinking! Proper heating or somekind of shelter for harsh winter conditions. CHILDREN! CHILDREN! CHILDREN! I see kids playing and riding their bikes in the field itself. Perfect spot and safe place to play TOGGOBANI on winter. It’s like the HEART of a perfect community: residentials, CHURCH, establishments. within it is a HISTORICAL PLACE the Calgary GEN HOSp Wall. FAMILY!!!
Serious!!!??? there is a PLAYGROUND, soccer field and HISTORICAL WALL the Calgary GEN HOsp in the proposed location. Around are RESIDENCES and a Lutheran Church. It’s a FAMILY PARK, it is a CHILDREN’s outdoor recreational field, close is a FUNCTION HALL too!!! Helloooo please it’s a common sense de
There is a noticeable presence of Drop-In Centre people around in this neighborhood. For the most part they are harmless and don't concern me, however my condo complex has been broken into as have the nearby units. Also wondering if black market sellers will be hovering around to sell?
It is close to a park where kids play, daycare kids go for their "nature walks" around here and kids also toboggan in the winter. I am also not sure who would walk to this site to smoke? It seems like this location was picked just because something was needed, however it is not required.
This location is within 300m of a Public School. This location is within 180m of a children's park. Spend energy reducing crime within the community. Assaults within Bridgeland have increased by 25%. Between 2012 and 2014 there were 62 "Assaults", Between 2015 and 2017 there were 77 "Assaults".
Yes, this area is already subject to a high crime rate. My worry would be that this would encourage even more crime as its an unsupervised park. This area is just a small spot on a larger park used by families and schools (toboggan hill and Langevin School uses spot adjacent for PE and recess). Containing users to this area will be difficult to regular and enforce and could end up just having a the entire park used as a consumption site.
It should be moved to the green space below the hill so smoke does not blow towards soccer field. And it is out of site from the field where children play soccer and people walk. This site directs usage in an area of a community heavily used year round by kids, school children, families, and pets. It is at the top end of a well used park with a playground, community centre, and school use areas. This is not a good site for cannabis consumption.
89/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Langevin school (K-9) uses the field regularly for PhysEd classes and recess. Young kids soccer is played just adjacent to the "planned consumption area". Families fly kites, play Frisbee, and walk dogs together around the entire park. You put the site right where young children will be exposed.
Yes. I am the owner of a pediatric therapy clinic, located in 7A, steps from this park. Many parents and children with disabilities, park on 7A to come to Spring Occupational Therapy. Our clients and therapists use the park for treatment sessions. My business could go under with this change.
Yes, it is very close to a playground area and a soccer field. I am against using this location. The entire concept and idea is ridiculous and has no legitimate merit. Do not try to solve a problem that doesn't exist. Put efforts into things that matter in the community, such moving forward with the ARP in a timely and collaborative manner and current planning and development issues.
All of Murdoch Park is a heavily used area of young families, sports, and other family friendly attractions. Other site users including Langevin School children, community mbrs pass by and usethe site/pthway on a regular daily basis. Langevin School children also use the site for outdoor education.
Safety - gathering spot creating potential opportunity for other "illegal" activity such as selling of drugs Not in favor of any "designated" sites. Why would Council think that these locations would be acceptable? Interesting that no other locations outside of inner city are being proposed? Either cannibus follows alcohol policy for public consumption or it doesn't or cigarette policy .
Langevin School use of entire park Day Care use, seniors walking Hill is heavily used in winter as a tobogan hill; school kids hang-out and pass through throughout day. Consider unintended consequences
Ensuring plenty of places for disposing of butts/related garbage so it didn't end up being litter. Clear signs/indication about the distances required from playgrounds. ensuring physical accessibility to the area (path clearing) and likely adding seating. Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas; will Council confirm within the proposed bylaw that these areas will not be used as candidates for Supervised Consumption Sites for the medically supervised consumption of drugs other than cannabis? Make attractive to people - benches, seating areas, tables to play board games or read a book, shelter from rain and sun, trees. Currently, the area is not particularly attractive.
90/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
To the east of Murdoch Park is a large playground and soccer field, both of which would be constantly contaminated by smoke from the cannabis area due to our predominant westerly winds. Surely a more appropriate location far away from the risk of affecting minors can be designated for this project.
In the winter, the hill facing east is used quite regularly by children tobogganing. I believe that the spot indicated could be moved a few metres to the SW which would be out of direct line of site from the hill. Yes. It should be treated the same way as tobacco or alcohol. People should not have to drive to one of four parks in the city to smoke a joint if it is actually legal. You do not want people driving stoned. Make it the same rules as tobacco and alcohol. How will the city enforce these ridiculous
Yes, Drug area will decrease value Of Homes In immediate Area Area On Dead end street,Attracting Homeless To Congregate For Long Periods of time-increased crime AreaCloseTo ChildrensPark, risk of be approached by drug sellers/users Area used by school students danger of being approached byDrug users
Ridiculous idea. No one needs to breathe in second hand pot smoke when in a park area. Seriously. Decreased property value of the surrounding condos (I won’t buy the one I’m renting if this bylaw passes), second hand smoke in the nearby playground, community hall and dog park, public intoxication, underage youth wanting to purchase cannibas illegally at the consumption site and increased crime.
This will cause disturbance for the residences nearby since it will attract more homeless individuals and people that are under the influence of cannabis to be out in the public. People under the influence of cannabis will likely cause increase the rate of crime in the area as it is already an issue my kids toboggan and play soccer nearby, schools use the green space proximity to elementary schools, heavy family use of the area Rather than having open spaces why don’t you open some legalized bars that allow for cannabis use. Murdoch Park is a family friendly park where family friendly events occur with a playground immediately next to it. It's also too close to residential. My children and I stand in this location to go tobogganing every winter. If installed we would be interacting with it, walking through it, standing next to it, on a near weekly basis. Yes, this park is used widely in the community for recreational sports, walking/playing for young families, and other individuals.
91/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Why would [personal information removed] want to see part of the Bridgeland neighbourhood turned in a drug zone. Green space is not the proper venue. Keep it out of public spaces and wait for a cannabis lounge Does the consumption site have designated hours similar to an establishment or since it is a public space, consumption is OK for all hours? So many issues I won't be able to list them all here. This is where I take my toddler(s) snow sledding in the winter and to the park in the summer. I do not want them exposed to open drug use. I don't even like smokers being allowed to smoke in public and infringe on my right to clean air...
It is too close to Langevin School the community soccer fields. Children from Langevin use Murdoch Park and the adjoining soccer fields immediately East of Murdoch Park for school recreational activities and community soccer as there aren't fields beside the school the way suburban schools do.
None, looks like a very fitting location City crime statistics show social disorder incidents for 2018 on average as follows; Bridgeland 94/mo, Inglewood 30/mo, Mission 62/mo, Hillhurst 63/mo. Introducing this new element into our community stands to significantly increase our already above average incidents.
There are lots of families with children who go for walks in this area and I don't think they should be exposed to the smell and to the stoners. I do not wish to be exposed to the smell and to the stoners. I am vehemently opposed to marijuana consumption in Murdock Park. I live within stones throw of this proposed space. This activity is detrimental in influencing neighbours especially our youth. It would attract other drug use such as needle injectables and trash therefrom. As taxpayer I am against.
Yes. This area is a high use area for families with children and school kids, (preschool, daycares, K-9). There is already an issue with drug use and this would make it worse. I don't children to normalize the use of drugs by repeatedly being exposed to this. Also, the health impacts of exposure.
This is our children’s toboggan hill. It is a poor role model and very visible to all community events at Bridgeland community centre. There should be easy access to monitoring and policing the public consumption location, not at the end of a turnabout. This should be relocated to a thorough fare.
It is close to the kids playground and a popular running and bike path for residents. It would be nuisance to have to deal with the smell of cannabis so close to a favourite outdoor spot for kids
92/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
You should consider: How does this site help Bridgeland become a Great Community? How does this site contribute to the greater good of Bridgeland Residents? How can you call one week an Engagement period? Why is Ward 9 the only place in Calgary to offer locations? Doesn't that seem strange? there will be many issue with any designated ... 1. children and non users 2.home values 3.traffic, potential crime and the homeless, as the centre is very close to bridgeland. 4. safety the community use of this area, particularly for very family-oriented events like soccer and toboganning. green space used by families, kids and schools. near homes, a church and right on a pathway
In my estimation the proposed location fails according to almost all of the applicable criteria and the values stated by Council: the area is frequented by children; the sports field; the toboggan hill; use by a school; near a pathway / entranceway; a natural area; dog walking. Crime and disorder.
Yes, this area is highly used by children. This area is highly used by the Langevin School Children for physical education, highly used by children who toboggan and play on the hill, and is next to a kids sport field and to a children's playground. Smoking and smokers would be in full view to kids
I support initiative to reduce speeds on residential streets. How ironic to simultaneously invite an influx of cannabis users from beyond a walking distance, to use cannabis here, and then probably drive through our neighbourhood. Seems like a glaring inconsistency. What am I missing?
There are schools, playgrounds, off leash areas, public pathways and low income housing in very close proximity. The Children's cottage and the Margaret C Resettlement/refugee home are in this area and I see no benefit for any of those people and children to have this site.
Traffic increase. Parking in area. Increase in other illegal activities such as drug dealing, loitering, garbage etc. People with children & families using the pathway system & park. The smell of pot is very undesirable and children, adults alike shld not have to be exposed to smoke. Opposed 2 ALL
93/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Proximity to park, homes, play area for Langevin students and community children. Impact on community: parking, hours of operation - noise/group behaviours, monitoring use, response to problems, concentrated numbers of ?intoxicated people in one area. Sense of safety for residents.
The area is across from the church which is incredibly disrespectful.People shouldn’t need to be exposed to the pot stench.The smoke area is at the end of the cul de sac near the edge of the hill.Already afraid to be around there at night it will now be even worse.Expect increased drug activity.
Until the impacts of cannabis legalization are measured and understood, this kind of initiative should not be considered or undertaken. Its a park with family and sports use daily, lots of children of all ages using the pathway system to and from the parks and recreational areas. This was the site of the general hospital, what a shame. This proposed site is too close to Langevin School and the community soccer fields( used for many school activities). It is also too close to the playground at the Bridgeland Community Centre and too close to the Bridgeland Community Building where many family orientated functions take place.
This area is too close to activities of children from nearby school, playground and recreational use area. This area is used by people of all ages, animals and impedes movement around the park This area is in front of a church a short walk from a school (Langevin School). This area also directly overlooks Murdoch Park, which is a community hub for Bridgeland/Riverside. I'm concerned that negative aspects of cannabis consumption such as the smoke & smell will negatively effect these areas.
I think this location is a decent choice. I would prefer somewhere with a bit more foot traffic, as I believe this would help keep people from overstaying their welcome, or feeling like they own the place. Proximity to children in field, church The majority of people who frequent that area of bridge land are young families, including my own. My child has asthma and I myself have a confirmed allergy to propylene glycol (a chemical that’s widely used in marijuana vaping liquid). This proposal will prohibit my family from accessing this area.
Murdoch Park is well used by local community and Langevin school, and is host to public and private events. It neighbours the BRCA Community Hall which also hosts public and private events. I feel a cannabis park designation would be in conflict with the current use there and at the BRCA Com' Hall.
94/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Local elementary and junior high schools use the area for sports and exercise. Local kids use the area to toboggan and play in the park. We should all be aware of the dangers of second hand smoke to children. Families with young children frequent the area/s and so it would not be a wise decision to put a cannabis area nearby The location is adjacent to a park and soccer field and in winter, its a busy sledding hill, so there are lots of kids. It is also currently sometimes used for illicit behaviour- which says to me that is it isolated enough for people to feel free to do that (needles often found there). There shouldn't be public consumption in open air spaces. Children from schools and who use the soccer field and playground would be walking right by this smoking group. The adjacent hill part of Murdoch Park is a heavily used toboggan hill by kids and families in the winter. Dog walkers and seniors stroll right by here regularily.
YES! Many! The nearby schoools, the fact Langevin uses that park and that area for Gym class, that there's an off leash dog park right there, and that many folks exercise their dogs on leash there too - read the reports and research of dogs getting into marijuana buts - LETHAL!
Yes, this exact location is used as a tobagganing hill for children in the winter and is next to a soccer field and near a playground also used by children in the summer... If safety, and proximity to sensitive land uses such as schools, playgrounds, and residences are of concern then this site makes absolutely no sense as the area is surrounded by children all year round. Students form the langevin school and other schools often go for walks right along the site path
Yes. Site is in view of, crosses, is near, or is commonly used by 1) church 2) playground 3) pubic walkway 4) dog park 5) natural area 6) several childcare centres 7) community association. Area currently has problems with public disorder and crime due to inner city location & proximity to DI.
The drop in center is somewhat close, however I do not believe a public smoking area will attract crime. People committing crimes are going to continue smoking where they currently do.
Yes, this is a nice park that is used regularly all year long by children/families, soccer games, schools in the area, Bridge Community Hall/Playground. Worried about bush fires/improper disposal of whatever and improper use of our park - worried about our safety when people are highly stoned/drunk.
I don’t want any designated public area. NONE. Not in a park or ANY public area. NONE. Weed is a mind-altering drug. Do not promte dedicated areas (underage/dealers). users should use it like alcohol: in home -not in public - unless that area has a one time permit. Or go to pot bars like wine bars
95/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 no if we can't have a glass of wine with our picnic then why should cannabis be consumed publicly?
Yes. This location is well used by the community, is located near a Church and school. The community uses this area as a winter recreational area. Allocating this public park supported by public taxes to address private issues of condos refusing consumption on their own property is abhorrent.
This is next to areas where many children play. Bridgeland is about young families and we don't need any more drug use in public. There's enough of it as it is. I wish the police would do something about it. Yes there is an issue with this decision. Murdoch Park is well used by local community and Langevin school, and hosts many events to public including many children. It neighbours the BRCA Community Hall which also hosts public and private events including families with children.
There is a community center and childrens playground within the proposed area. It is a high density living area with lots of children. Your initial areas should be in low density areas NOT one of the highest density areas Yes, firstly, it is close to schools and sport park and playground, making it unsuitable for this usage. Secondly, consider increased traffic on a dead end street with limited parking. My Family rides our bikes along the path in the area. I am worried about having to dodge tenants, tourists, or others seeking a safe consumption area. We currently do not have to dodge people smoking cigarettes or consuming alcohol. This initiative seems unnecessary. It is really close to the community centre, a playground and an off-leash dog park. What if a dog or child were made sick. There would be a potential fire hazard. Smell from the park and the impact to residents bordering the park. it is also only a couple blocks from a school. As written above this location should not be used in my opinion as I know that it isn't a very well-lit area in evening hours; during the day many children and mothers with strollers are using the sidewalks nearby. Also parking spots are meagre and users may drive to this proposed site.
The smell, proximity to play grounds and junior high school. NOT AN APPROPRIATE CHOICE. Doesn’t fit the criteria - Again, the proposed location is too close to the playground, sports field (frequented by kids of all ages) and a dog park. Community engagement was nonexistent. No city representatives attended the community town hall (Sept. 6). Do our opinions matter? I, among many, will not support [personal information removed] anymore.
96/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
YES. THIS IS A HILL WHERE KIDS REGULARY GO SLEDDING. Also soccer games (all ages including kids) play on th field below the hill during the summer. Bridge land is full of young families that enjoy taking walks around the community. Pot heads should get stoned elsewhere.
My two year old son goes to this park regularly with his day home within two blocks. This is right beside a soccer field, there are many kids who play soccer and go this park daily during good weather. Children, especially toddlers should not be exposed to cannabis traditional family use areas. south of 7A street is a tobogganing area with lots of kids enjoying winter activities and in the summer sporting events. To have a cannabis consumption area close by is simply reckless with utter disregard to the well being of children. There would be consequences such as misbehavior and violence.
Are you high? This space is near a Junior High, Soccer field (utilized very frequently), playground (my toddler goes to), Daycare, day-homes, highly trafficked residential areas, schools and playgrounds. It's close to an LRT, but what will prevent people from driving to location? Parking lot present
In fact, ANY public consumption spaces are a TERRIBLE idea but the one on Bridgeland is irresponsible. Have you seen how many families, A LOT of kids, and public in general utilize the proposed area? There is a school, a park, soccer field, community assoc, TOBOGGANING HILL ,just few a few metres.
This location is located on a beautiful family used hill near the heart of bridgeland. Families and children use this part of the park to play, explore and toboggan. School children pass by this spot DAILY as part of their curriculum and lunch break. Placing the area here is irresponsible. more benches and potentially picnic tables Area is already known for a high concentration of social disorder calls, encampments and illegal drug use not a safe place Closeness to playground and pathways used by families with children and dogs. Closeness to community market, church and residential area The location is a terrible idea and goes against all the City’s points, including proximity to schools, an accessible playground, a dog walking area, a field where kids play soccer, an ice rink in winter, a community centre. We have enough issues with drug addicts without adding this attraction here
There is a fair amount of social disorder along the river (drug/alcohol use, encampments, fighting) that may shift to cannibas areas where activities may be perceived as more acceptable. Also, I prefer an EBbY (everyone’s back yard) approach rather than making BL an attraction for cannibas users.
97/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Society will find a way to manage cannabis consumption not the city. There are smoking areas at hospitals, colleges, universities etc. They found a way to accommodate smokers. Leave it to institutes, community centers etc to solve. It is too close to Langevin school where my grand kids attend. You will see an increase of street bums in the area looking for butts and also trying to bum a free smoke. Tamper proof garbage cans wii be broken into by people looking to get a disgarded butt Totally unsuitable. Area frequented by students from local schools using the playing field, many children toboggan here in winter, athletic (yoga) and social events occur here. Too close to Drop In centre. Our community has more than enough societal problems and crime which will surely increase.
Close to off-leash area, close to a Junior high school, playground, kids soccer, etc. Could not have picked a worse location. How is it that this location would come to be selected with no consultation with the community (prior to being announced at Council). Not necessary to designate pot smoking areas. People shouldn't be hopping in their cars to drive here, smoke up, then drive home stoned. Too close to Langevin school, the playground, and sports field. How is the 5m consumption area going to be enforced? This area is on the route to the sports field where students from Langevin practice PE. The hill below the site is very popular for tobogganing for families with small kids.
Not much shade Some yuppies N/C The surrounding area may want to be shielded with trees or something to limit scent pollution in surrounding areas. Kid park. Would have to stay away. No. No, I think this is a safe environment for people to consume cannabis No. N/C Kids (8-14) pass by here from Langevin School for sports in Park. Winter time used by kids for tobagganing. The slope gets bone dry in the summer & is a fire-hazard. If people come by vehicles, do they then drive away stoned? Who polices this?? 1) Security of persons. 2) Effect on young people using the playground in the foreground. 3) This is one more cost centre we do not need. To police & ensure order here will cost taxpayers an arm and a leg! Too close to playground. High density area. Don’t need to bring other people into the park where parking is already an issue to residents. 3 daycares in area too. Winter it's a toboganning [sic] hill.
98/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
A playground is one block away. This site is fully visible to the kids. It is directly adjoining a soccer field. yes, my property value would decrease This is where my class does gym here and this would be a terrible spot. I don’t like the sent [sic] of it. I feel we already have many other issues like homelessness and crime in This area is where lots of kids play. There are also some poor sick low income people that have allergies to the smell /use of the cannabis. I would recommend that not having this in Bridgeland.
As someone who comes here for poking [sic] for shoping and restaurants it is a safety concern for me. Too close to public pathways, childrens playground, childrens playground, church, school, childcare business, day homes and sports field,. - kids walk by here daily - tobaggoning - playing in the park - this a park for recreation not pot smoking This is the heart of the community. Why is it being ruined for a select few? The school & church are right next door - bad idea This is a public , well used space for students/families and law abiding citizens. Ie: Toboganning [sic], soccer, playground, school activities, public events, people and dogs. Playground 50 m away 8-14 yr olds from local school pass by here for their sports classes. Proximity to families with small children playing in the park. Proximity to local church. Yes don't Yes, there's a school a block away, a park across the field, the church and my home. I already have enough problems at my own residense [sic] with pot smokers. There is a playground right there. Just a block away is a children's village or something. I jog by here & don't want to be getting high on my jogs or have my breathing compromised. YES! The location is close to the playground where there are many children. Close to the children's cottage & also close to the women's shelter & not far from the Drop in Centre & the Langevin School . This location is totally unacceptable - a park where children, school kids, and others spend time & should not be exposed to noxious smoke and posssible social disorder. Totally opposite to the high security environment & regulations related to cannabis stores. YES - Children from local schools use this as part of their phys-ed facility. Also many children/adults use this to play soccer. Stupid idea! It’s part of the playground/park used extensively for Langevin school and young families tobogganing as well as the general population of Bridgeland.
99/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Children tobogon [sic] on this hill all winter. Children play here all summer I walk my dog on this path all the time - don't want to be around people of not sound mind. THIS AREA IS USED BY CHILDREN. Summer and Winter. This is a VERY poor location consideration. existing problems with public drinking & drugs in this are proximity to children's play area YES ther are issue to be considered: 1) Murdoch Park is a Family & Public Park for the children & youth of Bridgeland who play soccer, ride bike & ride scooters around this park & this location is also where children toboggan from at the top of this hill. 2) Langevin kids have gym class here & use this area for other problem based learning & outdoor activities.
Yes - location Yes! This is a family, kid & senior used area. We already have HUGE issuesin this area that need addressed. SERIOUSLY what are you thinking? Yes - this hill (right here) is a play & toboggan hill for children. Many issues! 1) Unhealthy activity in close proximity to playground & sporting field. 2) Will result in impaired individuals. Park is a perfect place for outdoor sports and kids playground, Cigarette/alcohol/drugs and hemp should not be around. Close to playground. Contaminate the natural environment. too close to playing fields, play park pathway system is a major community route. School kids use fields often. Seriously this is our tobagan [sic] hill, should the parents get high while watching the kids? Please consider the following that will be affected by this proposed site!! 1) children playground 2) 2 elementary schools 3) 1 junior high community activities Legalization is good. Accommodation is dumb in the extreme. It's akin to providing a tabacco [sic] smoking area. Totally unneccessary. (Designate Mars for smoking of tobacco & cannabis.)
An area near a public park to smoke weed is crazy, it will encourage children to smoke Why not make it a safe injection site, public drinking area and public cigarette area? You are going to attract that crowd from downtown/drop in center. 1. By a parck [sic] Kids sleding [sic] hill Yes. It’s a [language removed] park. For kids. If my friends were to walk to the park we would all breath the smoke, it is near a playground where kids and families have fun, the health care will go up, people alergic to smoke, runners it will attract some drug people that could get out of hand. the community often has live festivals/shows in the bowl next to the proposed site. A family friendly safe environment to residences in this community. This site might draw in other drugs / crime.
100/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Within 500 m of 7 churches, 2 schools, the Bridgeland market and a family friendly soccer field!
Students from Langevin Science School are brought over here for fresh air & exercise The bowl is a wonderful safe well used snowhill in winter The flat is used by soccer groups even the fire department personnel. This is a meeting place for community events often involving children. Residents pass through here daily in their activities.
Sports field below - Elementary school 1 blk west - walking/running path going right past. (prevailing wind goes west > east) Children sledding in the winter - children period! Proximity to sports field & playground, also seasonal vendors & com league activities & off leash area. Area has also experienced needle use waste & vagrancy. How will hours be monitored, as well as garbage pick-up? Noise by-law? Also relative proximity to the D. I. -Right now children use the park frequemtly for recreation purposes, during the year. The City should not take this benefit away, just because certain group (the cannabis users) want to use the site for their own purposes. Stupid idea. If public consumption is to be allowed (which I think it should), it should be the same rules as smoking. Near schools - which use field for sports - two daycares & children from there in the park. There are kids playing in this park and nearby playground. The drop-in centre already brings us many issues. Yes! Awful location besides a church, walking paths & park. Schools nearby use this park. Children toboggan in this area! We have enough with the DC (dropping [sic]) center across. I just found a bottle of empty perscriptions [sic]? So why not attract more of that? It will attract more crazy and put surrounding areas in danger. 1. Near a park. 2. Sledding hill. 3. Children are near park 4. Bad for your body Have fun don’t smoke Yes, high traffic area of homeless people > will attract even more who potentially may bring other drugs. May become selling point for other drugs. Yes many!! I use the walking paths right next to this and will feel very uncomfortable sharing it with pot smoke. Also it is next to the Lutheran Church and the path is used by the students of the Langevin school who used the "bowl" and soccer field for P.E. classes! - parking - dense area already. -trash - playground, school & daycares -used for kids, Family Students from Langevin School take Phys-Ed classes here. Too near a school. - I use this hill on a 'regular basis' (3-5 times a week) with my (day home) children. (They run and roll down the hill and sled during winter).
101/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
1. Children activities, playground, around daily. Take my grandchildren there. 2. Sports field used constantly by teams and for exercise groups. 3. Bridgeland/Riverside Community Association building & sight [sic] for community activities 4. Bridgeland / Riverside Farmers Market 5. My & many others walking paths 6. Historic sight of old General Hospital
Children playing around (playground very close) Children riding their bikes in their bikes in the field Yes this is a family park. Where we bring our children to play. -> THE CHURCH -> Historical Place (Calgary General Hospital Wall) - playground for kids biking area Others / or nonsmokers may be against it as children may be around CHILDREN are playing around this field 1) A CHURCH is just step away (what? After praying you see people smoking and high on cannabis? 2) playground and soccerfield overlooking, very close 3) kids riding their bikes around within the area 4) CALGARY GENERAL HOSPITAL is historic place 5) is not great for winter place (slippery)
I am seeing right now kids playing and riding bikes in this field. Too close to church, homes, playground, sports field & community center. Weddings are done outside at Bridgeland /Com Centre. Not a proper spot for cannabis consumption. I don’t think you are considering the homes and condos that are very close to this site. Cannabis smells bad! Why should this place be considered! Defend your selection!! The location in Bridgeland is very popular for Calgarians to enjoy the unobstructed view of downtown. Why does it need to be used for cannabis users? What kind of policeing [sic] of this site will the "City of Calgary" offer? Is this going to be another drain on our police force. Heavily used park by outdoor school (Langevin), daycares, families with small children toboganning on hill and little tikes soccer lessons. No-one is actually going to travel to smoke weed. You are actually making driving high more likely. I do not believe so. Yes!! I proposed Tom Campbell's Hill Natural Park (Calgary). Shldn't [sic] be in public places only in "HELL" Children's afterschool care. Langevein school has phys.ed. there. Not in this area. Children play there year round - soccer to sledding
102/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Safe travel. Allowing the consumption of cannabis in areas where particpants have to travel to is dangerous to the public, just like liquor. Cannabis takes longer to metabolise [sic]. Why not open cannabis bars or cafes instead? Where participants could be monitored and aided if they need to get home safely.? This is also a toboggan hill. Familes with their kids come here in the winter. I think by making this a designated cannabis area, the current use of this hill area will deter the families. This area is use [sic] by individuals & groups for yoga and other fitness activiities, As a practitioner of yoga I do not want to breath in pot. This area is commonly used by schools & daycare children during the day. In the winter families and children use the park for winter sports. It is not a suitable place for cannabis consumption. The proximity to foot path, dog walking area, direct access for Phys Ed Classes frequent access/egress between Murdock Park and Langevin school, well used gathering spot & overnight location of the homeless, hillside growth that is often subject to grassfires as it is very dry, I believe the impact as it relates to these items should be obvious but - for example- I would not walk my dogs there ever again - the risk to their health is huge if they happened to eat a roach (butt)
3. Do you have any other questions or comments regarding the proposed location?
No This is incredibly irresponsible and shortsighted. Our Councillor chooses to ignore the issues that are piling up in this neighborhood and instead of finding solutions to those, working with the CPC to make this place safe, he focuses his energy here. No. I hope there will be opportunities to view the occasional concert in the natural amphitheater that occupies the green space to the north and east of this location. smoke of any kind is a health hazard to me, this is too close to parking, homes, play area for kids. I've seen children using this area for random play, flying kites and sledding, this is too close to where children like to play. Why would you consider putting this in a high traffic area? Stop swlling drugs all locations are rediculous. people are going to smoke where ever cigarettes are smoked. this is a waste of time. Why can’t this pilot project be in another hood ? I do not think that this is an appropriate location for the consumption area. It is an entry point to a park with playing fields and a playground. While I am sympathetic to homeless people and the situation with restrictions on marijuana use for apartment and condo dwellers, I think this location Is a poor choice. Please also consider that residents like me may have addiction issues. Problem for us.
103/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I am completely against all public smoking of canabis despite agreeing it should be legal. It should be treated the same way as tobacco and currently you aren't allowed to smoke that in designated areas. I do not wish to see consolidated use space for cannabis in my neighbourhood - that park is Why does it say, †œcalgary may suspend under safety or nuisance concerns―? Stereotyping at its finest. Were not crack addicts. And most of us are contributing members to society. If anyone is a nuisance its pokemon go players There is no way to monitor use of these proposed spaces and ensure that only adults of age are present, that there is no illegal dealing of cannabis in the area This location goes directly against the guidlines described above, it is directly next to a playground and soccer filed widely used by children. This location absolutely cannot be allowed. Focus on making the neighbourhood with the highest crime rate safe before adding to meth alley. And why would you add cannabis sites when you can't even drink outside in public. I would prefer that this area be clear of anything that promotes drug use, recreational or otherwise. Why not move it less central to McDougall park or far away from a space used by children and families. I cannot understand why you would pick such a location. I know working and ordinary people would not want to walk by this area to catch the C train I feel that when the city measured the distance to this location they measured from the playground boundary - this is incorrect the whole of murdoch park needs to be considered Regardless of location, I'm unaware of the City providing tobacco consumption sites, so why is the City providing cannabis consumption sites, and beside or at a park?! Grant business licenses, like bars or cigar clubs. Don't dedicate public space! Crazy I do not think it's appropriate for Ward 9 to host all of the sites. This proposed location is in the heart of the community and there are many children in the area playing in the playground/ soccer field that shouldn't be exposed to second hand smoke. I am strongly opposed to this location. Bridgeland is a young family neighbourhood and reducing exposure of the young children to second hand smoke should be a priority Why are all the locations inner city? Disagree with increase cost to taxpayer for maitenance clean up enforcement. incongruent with other prohibited uses policy. Newly legalized - is this even a problem? No community consultation on the location before picking it. Who thought this was a good location? Why would you even consider Bridgeland ? It has the highest Crime rate in Calgary and the Police are taxed to the limit now. There is a huge population of Seniors in the very nearby facilities. Do they not deserve clean air to breathe?? Alcohol isn't allowed to be consumed in public, why would cannabis be allowed? It's far more noxious. I'm for it.
104/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
How does the city propose to monitor leagal use of the sites? How will the city ensure there is no upswing in illegal sales and usage of cannabis in an area that is already a sensitive area for social disorder and crime I think this is a great proposed location due to the close proximity to my home. Why were the 3 areas selected not neighbourhoods such as Elbow Park or Mount Royal? I don't believe we require a proposed location for cannabis use. This should be done in the homes of users. The smell alone is intolerable and for someone that uses the park/walks through it frequently, I don't want to be bombarded with the smell. This is a great location What are all the sites inner city? Why not high density suburbs like panorama? I am most concerned about proximity to Langevin School. Why not make all public parks consumption areas? Or is the too scary for you government goons. This wont change with these sites available, these will not be used by anyone that i know, I can guarantee that.. Just wanted to give you some input from an actual smoker. No Please explain WHY you have chosen this particular location? Who is your target audience? This location is heavily used by families with children of all ages regularly. The smell of marijuana lingers and travels easily. The proximity to this field and playground is too close (field within 100M). The location is right next to a park where there is kids soccer, playground, and the neighbourhood is already struggling with derelict traffic crossing and surrounding the Edm Trail bridge. We need ALOT more street lighting from the bridge right into Br How visible and laid out will the area be I would like to know how a proposed site so close to children's soccer fields was approved. Since this site is so close to a field used for gym class and a playground, I worry about the wind and second hand smoke in those areas Why not the north edge of the park? More visibility, more visual interaction with neighbours. I feel that this point is too close to spaces used by very young kids'. If people can't smoke in their residences, boo-hoo. I don't feel sorry for them. Where are they smoking now? And they are smoking or wouldn't have this request. I would like to see cannabis consumption in a much wider variety of places as I don't think people will travel from other areato smoke. please take it somewhere else i do not believe that there is a need for designated pot usage areas and I think the bylaw should be change to kne similar to those that apply to smoking rather than alcohol. on that note,we do not have alcohol consumption zones why would we have pot zone This is a terrible location and must not move forward due to its proximity to children and sport activities. Don’t think any sites should be allowed in green spaces. Keep it indoors out of sight of minors. We should not be letting minors see consumption in public. Bad influence on the young
105/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
A public park frequented by kids isn't an ideal choice. It sounds like a safe consumption site is required, but allowing intoxicants in parks is the wrong path I think this is ridiculous. do we have a public drinking park? This seems too close to a residential area. But somewhere too isolated is not ideal either. Consider locating sites close to a police station. Please ensure adequate lighting regardless of location. I don't think that there should be any designated consumption areas. If people want to or need to consume cannabis, they can consume it in forms other than smoking. This is not as visible and others do not have to deal with the smell This proposal is great to provide options for those who cannot consume cannabis in their home. More designed public spaces are needed in the city. yes its right beside a public pathway, a church and a green space used by pets, children, Etc. So who polices that people stay in their "location". Our police resources are stretched and far to valuable to waste. There is an expression Take an inch and they will take a mile. This is a bad idea. Anywhere. I don’t have any issue with cannabis legalization; in fact i welcome it. However what I don’t understand is the following - if consuming alcohol in public places is illegal, why is smoking cannabis ok? No. Please survey how many condo dwellers will really use these benches? Suspect it is low. There are lots of older unused parks that can be used for this purpose. Why ruining this park which houses a community center for lot of children events? I 100% disagree with these location as I plan to build a family in this neighbourhood and don’t want my family to be exposed, I am also a dog parent and I walk my dog in that park he has already been sick because of weed being left behind on the floor very short sighted Choose a different site further away from where children play. No. Yes. The idea of creating four outdoor spaces in the inner city where the entire city can consume cannabis outdoors is ridiculous. This is no help to those living in the suburbs, and adds to problems already facing inner city communities. Try again. Its going to promote loitering, littering and bad behavior in an area that does not need any more of that. Pick somewhere else! No consultation in this location. How can city square this with tobacco and liquor rules. This seems like a liability for the city. Lacking seating Consider putting help call boxes to 911 like on CTrain platforms. To some MJ and alcohol go hand in hand. Potential for crime. Will this area be closed off or will it be marked somehow? Will the use of pathways and stairs be blocked or otherwise interfere with?
106/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 nope I am strongly against having a designated cannabis consumption area in my neighborhood, especially across the street from where I live. I plan to start a family here and would prefer it to be a family friendly neighborhood. There are already a lot of people in this area on various substances. Please do not add a consumption site into the mix. There is already a lot to handle here. Add in all the kids and you have a recipe for disaster. Why would the city chose an inner city area with drug and crime problems as the pilot for this type of park? I'm extremely disappointed that this is the investment the city puts into Bridgeland. There more areas for consumption the better and the more accessibile they are the better. Also they should be comfortable and sheltered from the elements, this area may be very windy sometimes since it is elevated Create areas in the industrial zones, far away from parks and nice public places Public consumption should not be allowed in any area, especially residential neighbourhoods and places where children can be present. Would a small non alcoholic cafe be able to open near the location, snacks and drinks to keep participants close to the proposed area. Helps prevent people walking into Bridgeland with Cannabis. Proper seating for groups, Cannabis users share a lot. Is the church on the corner there aware of this proposal? Has it been brought up on how the designated spot will impact events held in the park? The personal safety risk and the continuous vandalism at the Bridgeland Memorial LRT site can only be expected to increase, as will the transient campsites. All of these effects put an increased burden on Police enforcement. Why would this place ever be chosen- in front of a church, by a PARK where people go for fresh air? Put people who want to smoke any thing AWAY from children and green spaces. I do not support it. How does City Council reasonably expect a city of 825.3 km² to comply with a by-law that limits a soon to be fully legal activity to 1 of 4 public consumption sites? People also use that hill to slide down in the winter with their kids, and the green patch there to play ball and such. This is mind boggling, where is the thought process on this one???? FULLY DISAPPROVE. why here? Stick these locations away from the inner city where drug use is already a negative factor. MDU residents want to use them? They can take transit out to the suburbs. Proposed amendments claim to consider sensitive land use areas to be excluded from proposed sites, however proposed location seems to avoid consideration of several nearby features that would typically be considered impacted by cannabis activity,
107/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 as a physician I am particularly worried about the normalization of this drug for children, who are particularly vulnerable to mental health effects of this substance. Legal does not imply safety. This area does not reflect similar rules as alcohol. NOT IN BRIDGELAND!!! We have enough questionable people in the neighbourhood. My car and garage have both been broken into in the last 45 days. Neither are the first since moving to Bridgeland 6 years ago. How will the area spacing of these designated areas be identifiable? I feel there are better locations around the city to trial for this project. Bridgeland is inner city and accessible, but is also prone to crime and frequent acts of mischief. This is a family neighborhood and already is losing its feeling of safeness. Best to keep the smell in one area so I can avoid it, as the odor of marijuana makes me ill. My main concern is how close it would be and would users be able to confine themselves to a certain area. I would not want any one's pet to be at risk of picking up some leftovers and consumer, which poses a risk to the dogs' health). Is there another area that is further away from schools & students? Very much against this proposal all zones should be inside, you can't walk around with a beer why is another intoxicating substance ok? ill be smoking where cig smokers smoke thanks Why can there not be a public meeting about this. I am not good on the computer so i would like opportunity to attend a meeting regarding this. It should not be approved. I think the city should reconsider assigning this area as a designated consumption site. This site is a poor choice due to it's proximity to various public and private facilities, as well as being close to central pathways Please do not allow this. Cannabis locations should be restricted to areas only where open alcohol and smoking tobacco are permitted. I think this is a great location and their needs to be more locations. It's too close to an approved cannabis retailer. The area will become a destination for irresponsible use of cannabis, i.e. Out of town partiers, transients, etc nothing good will come from a public area where people smoke to get high I Other than the parking this seems like a suitable site Can we have a location created in Rotary Park? It seems better suited for this purpose. In the playground, & when passing through the 4th Avenue flyover into downtown. I believe we need to have legal consumption sites and Bridgeland would be a good location.
108/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Love the idea of having designated spaces in Bridgeland. There are other green spaces that do not contain parks that would be better. Also it may attract people on the c train so further from a station would be better. Terrible idea to put it here- please find a new location away from the general public use areas and pathways of this community for everyone's sake- we don't need this advertised to the children in the community. Frankly I'm shocked this has even been proposed. This doesn't belong in Bridgeland, and will really impact family/lifestyle/quiet neighbourhood for the worse. This location is not ideal. Consumption sites should be limited to private business establishments, not public property. Why is cannabis different from alcohol? There should be no cannabis smoking in public. I have no problem with some people smoking pot however I do have a problem with the city opening up my neighborhood to be the pot consumption site I pay a lot of money in taxes I live in a trendy downtown area and this will hurt resale values In our sane and just society and community, you just can not permit Cannabis and prohibit alcohol use! As someone who moved to Bridgeland about a year ago and hoped to live in bridgeland long term and start a family here, this is not how I would like to see public space used. I liquor is illegal in public places, why should drugs be allowed? I thought they were going to be treated with the same rules. How are those with a medical license affected by this change in law? Unlike alcohol consumption, smoke is not something that stays in a particular place. How can you designate any public space and not adversely affect non drug users Yes, please reconsider. Smoking cannabis smells. And people gathering to party and the smell of canabis should not be a burden to the adjacent residents I am very opposed to this consumption site site. I think that this is not a good idea and given that the mandate of the Science School is to use the outside as a classroom I think this is not a good sight. Why is an outdoor consumption area needed? It will be unmonitored location where kids could potentially be given access to cannabis. Would like to know how and why the areas were selected? how will it be contained to the area? will there be ongoing monitoring? If this goes through I will be expressing my displeasure in the next election No Also, in winter very young children sled down the hill. Year-round, people walk their dogs here. What a disgraceful suggestion. why can't govt follow the same rules as drinking, in your private homes, or in weed bar, over 18. easy!
109/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I think it’s wrong to encourage consumption in a park that is used by minors. Not only is this area close to a school but this park is frequented by minors. it is critical that any consumption area be secured and those under the legal consumption age be protected not only from access to the area, but also to second hand smoke. it would be important to understand what criteria was used, since this site is within 200 m of a busy community playground. This is in very close proximity to sports fields where children play and socialize. A very poor location choice. The time spent on this could be better spent on important issues such as affordable housing and repair of infrastructure. I do not think having a handful of designated sites is the way to keep people from smoking marijuana. I would rather have our public parks be available for marijuana smokes at DESIGNATED TIMES only. Mayne during low traffic times. N/A It doesn't make sense to put it beside where all the kids play in the winter. No consumption sites should be provided by the City. Again, why have consumption sites?! Like smoking cigarettes do it in your home or whatever, have general rules around use, but there aren’t cigarette parks. How stupid! If you're allowed to smoke cigarettes in your residence what is the difference? What about medical? Could a more isolated area be selected as a designated area? Since no one yet knows the impact. I am not against it but I believe experimenting it in non-busy areas can prevent the public from reacting too intensely to it. Why is the city choosing this location? Better yet why is the city looking at implementing consumption sites. This idea will not only not work it will have negative impacts on whichever community it is established in, just same as there is no proposed con Nobody will go to this site just to consume. Driving is not an option. Ridiculous! Why don’t we put a public user space out by the city dumps. It’s away from public who don’t want it and the air already stinks. Why should I have to endure walking through a cloud of marajiuana smoke on my way to work, or tobaganning with with my son? I am opposed to having a consumption area in Bridgeland. no Absolutely not in public parks. This infringes on people’s rights to not have to be exposed to the smell. Bridgeland has enough social disorder, we don’t need anymore. If drinking in public is not allowed, cannabis should not be either. Too close to schools & student walking routes This is the wrong question to ask. It’s not the location that’s the problem. It’s the lack of locations. Or rather, the inability for city council to stop treating cannabis as an ILLEGAL DRUG. I can drink a beer in a bar. Why not a cannabis lounge?
110/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Why? Why would anyone that doesn’t live within 50 m of these sites visit these sites? It makes more sense to have smoke rooms. Let the businesses capitalize on it. Smokers don't need to unite. The whole proposal is baffling. Same comments apply to all proed locations. Need more locations, like my landlord’s yard. Perhaps give us more than 255 characters! and TIME! Our councilor should ACTIVELY participate in the discussions being held in the community pages on facebook. And not just send his communications "team" to post links. Pathetic It does not discriminate against people who may not have the financial resources to own a home. Yeah, where will be the designated area be for drunks to sit down and polish off a bottle of vodka in public? if alcohol consumption is not allowed in public , neither should cannabis consumption. It does not discriminate against people who may not have the financial resources to own a home. if alcohol consumption is not allowed in public , neither should cannabis consumption. Is this really necessary Why would you even consider doing this, its just a bad idea Not a good area for cannibas consumption. Lots of kids and young families in the area. How will you keep children safe in that park since it’s next to a soccer field Why arw we proposing these at all? Cannabis shohld be treated as a medication or when used recreationally, similar to alcohol and thus, with the same regulations. I can't imagine how families using the park will be affected by it becoming, basically, a party zone. There should be NO designated areas. Non dopers have rights too!!!!!!!!!!! too close to residensial area and playground and also there is a lot of senior homes There should be NO designated areas. Non dopers have rights too!!!!!!!!!!! I oppose having Murdoch Park as a consumption site. THIS IS IRRESPONSIBLE. THE AWFUL SMELL OF SMOKED MARIJUANA WILL NOT BE CONTAINED IN A PARK AND WILL DRIFT TO ALL AREAS AROUND. YOU HAVE NO CONTROL ON WIND DO YOU? I feel you should consume in establishments for both alcohol and cannabis or at home if you do for one should be across the board Why is the city considering consumption of Cannabis in public spaces? Inglewood location is situated in an industrial site. An alternate site, adjacent alongside Deerfoot Trail parallel Bow Valley bike path underneath 16th avenue ramp way leading to Deerfoot Trail south? Bridgeland has worked very hard to create a safe, family friendly community. As a condo owner facing this park and a woman, I want to continue to feel safe when walking my dog around this area night or day. Please do not compromise this very special area We do not need any public spaces for cannabis. Move it elsewhere, like east of Deerfoot and North of Memorial...
111/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 comment- to put it further from housing and not in a community already dealing with homelessness and other issues due to proximity to downtown and drop in center Why does there have to be public consumption areas when there aren't public consumption areas for alcohol. There needs to be a trial with a known drug, like alcohol, before this. It’s outrageous that this would be permitted with no person responsible, no supervision etc. This makes no sense whatsoever and will only increase the problems with drug dependency. Did council hit the bong before proposing this idea? Please STOP this initiative. Do NOT add to the issues that we are already experiencing. Why is this necessary? Have out of site ie; Amsterdam cafes should be looked at. No Why aren't the cannabis rules matching the alcohol rules (which don't permit consumption in a city park)? Bridgeland already deals disproportionately with those dealing with addictions, and associated crime. Adding a public space for folks to get stoned will only exacerbate this issue. Place such sites well away from homes and play areas. This is rediculas to consider in bridgeland. we walk all the time. Not interested in seeing baked people in the park as much as I don't want drunk people. Why are there consumption sites only in ward 9? Why not anywhere else in the city? It is too close to the park and the area is already sketchy. Also people will use the area to get high and then what? Hangout at the park or walk around the neighbourhood?? Probably the best location in bridgeland given proximity to residents and desirability to actually go to The proposed location is used for tobagganning in the winter, school children and daycares on a regular basis as well as children playing daily. It's already been used for inapporopriate activity that isn't being resolved by the city. I don't think it's safe. You will have police there all the time. It's going to cause lots of risks. Don't do it! how about some public alcohol consumption sites? At least you aren't bothered by second hand smoke, you aren't bothering anyone. Prince's island? I am worried that the city (CPS, bylaw) will be biased against users in these locations, which will affect the use of the locations (i.e. discourage use by the general population). Liquor is legal but I can’t drink sitting ther. Why should we provide a location for people to smoke? There are other options for those that can’t smoke. Brownies are delicious and not something a landlord would ban. I'm not sure why we need to accommodate cannabis smoking but if we do, then I'd rather see lounges than contaminate public spaces that many families use. Tom Campbell his, which is much larger, with few people would also be better. This does not seem like a great solution to public consumption of cannabis but it’s better than nothing. It’s ridiculous that it’s being so restricted while cigarettes are allowed most anywhere outdoors.
112/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
What is the city thinking with this location? It’s horrible. Kids are concentrated in this area. All areas of the government have a responsibility to keep cannabis away from children. It’s so close to a school it wouldn’t be allowed for a retail location. I don’t understand why this proposal is even being brought forward. There are bigger issues to be addressed in Ward 9. Try to put this in Mount Royal stop imposing this on bridge land. Why not try east village where there is more high density yet also has parks nearby How in the world was this location selected - after the approval of the marijuana store next to the community Starbucks pushing out a local retailer, this is a magnet for what this community does not want. Community impact study done w/ DropIn Centre? Designate a few of the million cannabis stores being proposed as 'smoke shops' where users can easily access what they need instead of beautiful public spaces that are currently welcoming and also a safe, comfortable place for our kids to play. It is not my problem if someone can't smoke in their residence, but this location makes it mine. Many apartment buildings don't allow pets, this is also not my problem. I'd love a hot tub in my condo unit but not allowed - should city make an area for me? Perhaps use an area closer to the senior homes or off the beaten path. Why can't smoking weed be the same as smoking a cigarette? Leave the parks as they are. I strongly disagree with this proposal! I absolutely oppose this location. Totally inappropriate.the population of young children in Bridgeland is exploding. We need parks and green spaces for them to play as they grow. Perhaps under the 4th ave flyover is a better location If people need a place to consume this where a private home is not available they should go to a cannabis store. Similar to one wishing to vape at a hukka bar where it does not disturb the public or the public enjoyment of a green space. No questions, only MUCH concern as a mom of a toddler, baby on the way and preteen. What community impact study has been done with regard also to the close proximity to the Drop In Centre...concerned more drug-related issues with this location. Bridgeland does not have much for open parks compared to most communities. Maybe a location somewhere on Tom Campbell's hill is suitable but for now this is ill thought out No Is this only an area with a 5 metre radius? Where exactly in the park is it? It’s not the whole park with the soccer fields, paths and playground? If a public consumption space is needed, it would perhaps be better suited for a location that doesn’t have children present on a regular basis as this will be a very big concern for my young children. Although I do not live in the are I work fir a company with extensive land holdings in the area.
113/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Will furniture be provided, or should I bring my own lawnchair? I worry that this spot will become congested with people who wish to smoke for a longer duration, and are essentially forced to camp out in the 5m ring until they're done. I am disappointed. We have a great opportunity to improve Calgary, instead we are trying to hide marijauna consumption even though it will be legal and is already largely accepted. No No It'd be Inappropriate to have this consumption area where school children frequent, and harmful. No, I feel like you are prObably getting a lot of negative feedback but there are a lot of peopl who are actually very supportive of it In allowing for public use sites, it is not pushing the government towards finding better solutions to allow people to publicly consume cannabis in areas that do not impact non-canmabis users such as lounges. Push to solve the problem,don’t make a bandaid Wondering how you will prevent children from seeing drug use in their community? Why not move it to McDougall park or somewhere else in the SE corner of the community. Or close to Edmonton trail This will be the area that the drop in people come and hang out and before you know it your †œgreat idea― will go down hill faster then you can blink. Please don’t do something stupid to accommodate the people who are already smoking it know. THINK! Does [personal information removed] wish to be elected again? Because I certainly will not vote for him if this goes into effect. why would it be proposed when it does not meet the criteria? Why isn't it legal everywhere? Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal everywhere. Should be legal everywhere. Is this really the best location you could think of? I would prefer that people went to cafes to smoke and not outside. The Community Centre, which is often used by families and for events such as weddings etc, is within 400m. Based on other issues in this area such as alcohol & drug use, it's likely that those consuming won't stay within the area Why Bridgeland/Riverside? Why all inner City locations? Why would [personal information removed]actually think this is a good idea? How will The City monitor the area? Is [personal information removed] going to monitor it? How will the increased safety and nuisance risks be dealth with? Why only three communities Please move this designated space somewhere else. Perhaps up the hill closer to 16th Ave. Why did you choose this location? How do you see it benefiting the community? How would the location be marked? Fence? Tent? How would you deal with inappropriate behaviour at this spot? How would you feel about your kids walking, biking by or watching
114/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
The neighborhood already struggles with drug use and transients ciming thru. Allowong for cannabis use inthe area will not aid our efforts. Please DO NOT move forward with the current model proposed, this is counter productive and counter intuitive to those who use marijuana. I am not happy with this being a drug consumption area, keep bridgeland clean and drug free Not the best idea to make a public zone where everyone can congregate to a single location. The Ward representative needs to shake his head and consider what liability he is accepting for the citizens of Calgary. The city is catering to the pot users, I think designated bars or lounges with outdoor patios would be a better choice. We don't have a choice when it comes to consuming alcohol ! City of Calgary doesn't offer designated drinking parks! So why for pot? I feel like the city didn't do a good due diligence on studying the purpose of the sites and long term effects on community. we do not want people to start using harder drugs in these areas and turn our neighbourhood into east hastings street in vancouver Bad spot in general. Close to school, playground, pedestrian traffic. People will still smoke weed wherever they want. This is a colossal waste of money, time , and my tax dollars This is close to Langevin school, the CA playground and the winter tobogganing hill. Does not fit the:150 m from a school * 100 m from areas intensively used by children, including playgrounds, sport fields, spaces with play amenities, or family-friendly I'm still going to smoke up by the river. It's therapeutic for me. A public park is not an appropriate place for smoking. There are no designated public parks for drinking alcohol, so why would there be for smoking pot? If people want a public place to smoke, let them open cafes. Stupidest idea ever. Was [personal information removed] smoking marijuana when he thought of this idea?? We don't allow beer in parks. Why pot? Why are there o my 3 neighbourhoods? why would it be legal to smoke grass in public, while individuals cannot consume alcohol, is [personal information removed] going to suggest alcohol consumption sites? If this proposal passes, I know who I will not be voting for in the next election Leave marijuana consumption in bars, like alcohol There are already a number of vagrants and criminals in the bridgeland area. I believe this smoking area will attract more and is uncessary. There are many times I feel unsafe walking through the park because of the number of vagrants already. There should b engine in the city and it should be enforced. People who wish to partake should do so in their private property. How long till public sites spread to all parts of the city?
115/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
This is a terrible idea. In an age where we're trying to limit smoking and alcohol consumption, this site is a step backwards. The park is used by the general public including children Pick a different area. This one fails almost all of the requirements that YOU defined. We, the neighborhood, already have to clean up homeless drug paraphernalia and garbage. Around the park. We don't need to make it a local hangout. This is a bad spot. The proposed locations shouldn’t temove the I don't understand why the city will not change its stance on pot lounges. This would open the door to a profitable and unique part of the population. This could help small businesses in this province as oil sands is not giving the province money. Why is a 'Public Consumption' Site needed? Is there Public Consumption sites to consume Alcohol? No alcohol is consumed in paid establishment, not tax payer funded properties. City needs to stop rushing changes. Allow the legalization and let people acclimatize to the idea. This will become an election issue. We don't need to be more progressive than Amsterdam. Slow down and let thing settle out. Cannabis should not be allowed to be consumed in public areas How on earth did they ever come up with this? This entire idea is ridiculous. No public spaces just like we don’t have public alcohol parks. Children go to this area of the park frequently - I worry about second hand smoke of any kind being breathed by children, since children have few places in the city to run around and have free time in fresh air, I feel pot park would exclude children. I can't believe this location is even being considered. Tom Campbell hill would be the only area I would deem remotely appropriate, given its large size, windiness and low foot traffic. Please, we do not need public consumption sites for cannabis users. no public location is ok, can't drink beer in public, don't think anyone needs to smoke in public I don't believe these have a place in any community. I do not want to smell cannabis or see people consume nor have my child exposed to this in the open. Public spaces should not be provided. Please reconsider Why was this proposed location selected? Had there been any consultation with the very active community groups in the neighbourhood? How will this 'prevent' public consumption? BAD IDEA. The city has lost its Mind’s!!!!! We have families that live right across that street. if you are treating it the same as alcohol and tobacco then do that, no special benches, there are valid reasons you cannot smoke tobacco or consume marijuana in shared places sucha as condos and hotels Legalized consumption is a terrible idea.
116/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
100 m from areas "intensively" used by children including playgrounds and sports is not an acceptable rule. The area is a park for families and children use with playgrounds and sport fields therefore not suitable for a consumption site. Use should be modelled after alcohol. Provide smoking lounges / bars not outdoor areas. This is a really bad idea that doesn't seem to be thought about enough. Will the area be covered? Cannabis should be treated exactly like cigarettes, and fall under that by-law. If it's too late to take that approach, then these sites desparately need to be throughout the city. Immediately. Not after creating deadzones in these four neighborhoods. It is not good city planning practice to put all the problematic issues in one place. Bridgeland doesn't need more trouble. Let private industry (e.g. cannibis lounges) take care of this - it's winter 6 months out of the year anyway. Better to be inside. People need to do this inside. Given that there are only 4 spots in the city, I'm concerned about possible high usage, and negative impacts on the space, which is well used by residents, many of them children. You need to consult with the 3 schools, the churches, and businesses too. Why doesn’t the city treat this matter the same as smoking cigarettes? Why do people need to drive to a select area to smoke. We have laws in place for alcohol and smoking which can be used for marijuana consumption. This is a terrible idea! What on earth are you thinking? Why do you need a designated area? Why can’t it be like alcohol where it’s either in a licensed placed or at home. Has The City of Calgary sought advice from Sgt. Rick Butler, Alcohol & Drug Recognition Unit, Calgary Police Service for advice and recommendations in addition to cannabis, could this also be used for safe injections and general drug use? should be treated the same as public consumption of alcohol Legalization of the cannabis was too far and this is making it worse. the city should be looking at changing the by-laws for cannabis use - it should be treated no differently than smoking cigarettes. This feels more like a punishment and segregation on an item that will be legal across the country Cannibas shops should provide areas within their shop to allow for smoking. Who would maintain the area? for Garbage and traffic. Why in the offleash park, why in front of a church, we don't want drugs around there See above, I think a better location can be found in Bridgeland. Perhaps on the hill below the Tom Campbell dog park? It does not belong City owned Parkland, or any where near a residential community. Users can invest in setting up similar structures like they do for alcohol consumption. They are called bars!!!
117/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 also a known problem area for drugs, vandalism and theft. It is ill-advised to create a cannabis site at this location and unacceptable to even propose a site in our community It is an unsuitable location, and why risk not only the health of children and students but also impaired smokers may behave inappropriately. Children living in nearby condos have no other place to play. Parents would not want them exposed to pot smoke. Crime here is awful. Who thought of this. Why is this an option. Absolutely no. This area will no longer be desirable to non-smoking tax payers. Allowing something that infringes on other enjoyment of the land should not be allowed. Perfectly sheltered for when it rains There should be multiple throughout the city as well as cafes No No. It this already approved or still in discussions, I hope will be no approved. I would like to see this go through, I wanted to put in my words of support because all I see online is negative comments about this Can i send a video of the disgusting filth the smokers have left in front of my house and in the dog watering dish? I think they have proven how they respect public areas already. Same people smoke weed who smoke studies show ten times more likely I support having green spaces. I wish to consume cannabis in a polite and respectful manner. also close to residences, they may have concerns, and large transient population in area/drop in centre may start to frequent this location so could attract more attention (not ncecessarily a bad thing but could become a nusiance with all things consider I strongly disagree with any consumption sites. Further, consumption on private property should be subject to containment of smoke and odour on that property. I'm in favor of these sites, and I think this is a resonable location, however I think additional sites need to be available throughout the city to avoid people commuting to/from them while impaired Where’s the nw locations? Marijuana will be legal but illegal to smoke? Why did you choose this location? It doesn't fit with City requirements...there's a park right here that children and families use. Something closer to a downtown core location since it's happening anyway. In December I was walking into Bow Valley College before an exam and inhaled second hand cannabis smoke outside the building. Please consider a downtown location (s). Pot is no different than cigarettes and should not be treated differently. These public use areas should not be allowed. Whether the tenant smokes or does not smoke in the apt/condo is between the Landlord and Tenant I think it is a really bad choice for picking this location as this is a high-density area with all the condo constructions and all the amenities around (restaurants, coffee shops, and small shops). I don't want to imagine if that really happens.
118/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
This park was created to foster a cohesive neighborhood for the Bridgeland community. Public intoxication of any substance degrades this important approach. It is illegal to drink alcohol and be intoxicated in public. Why should cannabis be different? If the laws are to imitate alcohol consumption will open alcohol also be permitted in the designated area? I see this as another barrier to the safety with the users that would be attracted to a site like this. The area doesnt have a natural boundary and will likely expand closer to areas where children are. I do not think this site is a good area for cannibis consumption I would encourage the city to revisit this site and policy of consumption sites - this is far better addressed through coffee shops or lounges similar to bars rather than in outdoor public spaces. In general, I think it is ridiculous that public cosumption of Canabis has been made illegal while Tobacco can be smoked anywhere. I appreciate [personal information removed] initiative in starting this discussion. Who will fix and repair damage to the area and ensure safety and health of public will be upheld. Cannabis should be no different than alcohol in regards to public consumption. Cannabis is a drug and should be treated at the local level, legal or not. Say "No" to setting up any areas in Calgary for this drug promoting use. Asking for trouble when you have a large group in one area doing drugs. Perfect setup for more illegal drugs to be sold by drug dealers. Naive to think this isn't going to happen. Gian-Carlo, you cannot be serious with this one. Bridgeland needs so much more from you than this. If this goes through you have lost my vote. Even the pot-smokers I know are opposed to it. Give your head a shake with this ridiculousness. We need more spaces. It is appropriate to have a consumption site in this area due to the high density housing in the area. People in condos are unable to consume/smoke on their property so this locations makes sense. no Need places convenient to Seniors who are new to this, maybe near Chinook Have you considered McDougall Park as an alternate. No playground and I almost never see families or children using that park. Apart from some baseball games, quite vacant most of the time. Please, please consider our children!!!!!!!!!! Start thinking of this from a smokers point of view. Somewhere reasonable to go in the winter or inclement weather....Who's going to travel to these places when its 40 below....? I'm really into the idea of adults-only playgrounds. I think the entire idea of consumption areas is terrible. What are the hours of operation? none I am not aware of any plebisite or consultation from the Ward 9 councillor, prior to his proposal. Will this also be an alchol consumption site? Both will be legal and I don't see why one and not the other would be permitted.
119/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I think that it is a horrible idea. And should not be made at all I am concerned this was announced without any public consultation in the neighbourhood and that it is being pushed upon us - all for a 'potential concern' in a privately owned facility Why would it be proposed in an area that is used by families, near a community hall, near a pathway? How will it be controlled and monitored? will the neighbourhood have increased police patrols? Does [personal information removed] want to be reelected, I think not. The idea to designate gathering areas for pot consumption is wrong on all levels and sends the wrong message to everyone. Your questions are loaded. We don't want this in Bridgeland PERIOD. There is no need to legalize a pot smoking location, it's senseless. Condo dwellers will have to continue smoking as they always have. This is not a public issue & unfair to put on us Keep illegal to consume cannabis in any form (smoking, vaping, or edibles) in public places I think this is a good start for a choice for consumption area in the city The whole concept of designated consumption locations is ridiculous. Scrap this idea and come up with a new, better one, please. I am a home owner in Bridgeland and I have no issue whatsoever with this proposal. I think it may be a nice way to meet like minded people in my community. I feel this location is far to close also to the community centre which is a very family friendly location where people love to play with their families. It would be very unpleasant to have the smell lingering there every day. Too close to Langevin also. Are you contributing to clean air or to environmental polution ? 4. This location will exacerbate the loitering and drinking that occurs in this park from time to time. Suggest of cannabis is being treated like alcohol with restriction, to also have facilities where cannabis can be consumed ca having them in public parks. We aren’t allowed to openly drink in public parks. The sites are a horrible idea. If you cannot be intoxicated in public with alcohol, why should you be able to be stoned in public? This looks like an opportunity to invite more drug problems into our community. I do not understand why public spaces are even up for debate. Bars are private and you can’t drink outside! I have nothing against approved consumption areas however this location is not desirable for the community. This is a private property issue and not a public property issue. This is a waste of taxpayer's money, the laws should mirror the smoking bylaws Council created the problem that this idea is trying to 'fix'. Why not just allow smoking in public places, as the Alberta government has decreed is ok. I understand the concept, but it is an inadequate response to a big problem of where to consume cannabis. Follow Provincial guidelines, will solve it.
120/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Why does council feel it is necessary for outdoor consumption sites to be put into place. We feel all the legislation is being rushed to fulfil a political agenda Allow indoor consumption businesses to be established for those people who consume cannabis. I vehemently oppose any cannabis consumption areas. It is not allowed for alcohol in park areas so it should not be allowed for cannabis, marijuana or whatever you want to call it Why are all the locations inner city? Why do pot smokers get special treatment? Pot is equivalent to cigarettes and tobacco in all other respects so why a "special area" for them? I do not support the public use of cannabis and do not want it allowed in my backyard. Not in my backyard. Cannabis use should be kept in private areas. Not in public spaces where families frequent. An area closer to memorial would be more appropriate. Just that this location is not a good one. Maybe build a park just for that reason where there are no families. How does one keep the site designated as such and it does not get larger or closer to other buildings? How does one police such an area? Cannabis consumption laws should mirror liquor consumption laws. How would the area be segregated from the rest of the park? I'm actually shocked that you are seriously considering the community of Bridgeland. If you listened to CBC eye opener this am then your stats are screwed. They interviewed renters, young people and people without kids. Go into the heart of Bridgeland Please keep it high viability and inviting, not shady or unattractive. Why are all three locations in lower socioeconomic/demographic locations? Why isn’t there going to be one in, say, Oakmoor? West Springs? If the police will not be monitoring it who will? How can the city ensure that the cannabis consumers stay in the approved area? Is there a curfew? If so who monitors the curfew? Is alcohol allowed to be consumed as well? Like alcohol, marijuana should be consumed on private property or in licensed facilities. There is no need for public park space enjoyed by many who do not smoke to be designated in such a manner as proposed. No Why does our Ward have all the public consumption areas? Bridgeland is trying to be a family oriented urban community and the addition of a designated Adult orriented public consumption area is not appropriate. No Why hasn't the community been consulted sooner? Would a site on St Patricks Island not be better? Is there really any need for public consumption sites? Common sense dictates that pot users will continue their already established habits. There is no need to reinvent the wheel.
121/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Not here. Definitely not here，it may fit all your criteria but your criteria then obviously is not sufficient to provide a safe and healthy environment for Calgarians. This is a terrible idea for those houses that are in the area. The smell of smoke carries long distances and increase in unwanted traffic to the area No My children are attending Langevin and will be using public transportation via the Bridgeland train station likely using the paths through this park. Although we don't live here , we also have friends in this area and use the parks and pathways. Does this follow protocols established in other countries with similar practices? I have no objection to the consumption generally but we don't consume alcohol in public spaces so I'm puzzled by this format. While I hold a neutral opinion about the legalization of marijuana, I am VEHEMENTLY opposed to the idea of a "pot park" anywhere in the city. Public consumption bylaws for marijuana should restrict its use to where tobacco AND alcohol are allowed. It does not fit the community culture and will deter from the family orientated neighbourhood. Population of Bridgeland is not large enough Users will be draw from other neighbourhoods. i think private business should be engaged to provide consumption There is no way to contain the smell...if approved, this park will become un-family friendly. Worried about increase in crime to nearby homes. Too close to school, too close to playground, too close to children playing in the field. It is next to a major foot traffic pathway and the field beneath is a intesivly used play area by children No. I don’t agree to have a location to smoke drugs so close to a field and parks. This will not help with the increase in crime rate in our area The population of children in the community is rising dramatically and many seniors as well. In the summer it's a fun hill for play and in the winter it's a toboggan hill. There are also several daycares/dayhomes/seniors facilities in the area. How could this site meet the criteria? Who made this decision? Will they be fired or reprimanded? Why do I have to fight this when it is so clearly wrong in the first place? Look for somewhere where children and youth do NOT routinely play to build a cannabis consumption area. Keep cannabis consumption and youth separated for the safety of adolescents - there is ++ medical evidence of harm to adolescents from marijuana use. I hear complaints from my community about this space being where they bring their kids, but I believe having designated areas outside is better than people "sneaking" a smoke in condo units where those families LIVE. These parks are PUBLIC areas after all Creating these parks is not even remotely a good idea. You can't drink alcohol so why do you need these parks? Who is pushing for this? Is it another PC idea to cater to one small group. Fine to legalize like alcohol but scrap this stupid idea. There are already significant issues in the community with the consumption of illegal drugs/public intoxication and social disorder. Providing a space attracting such activity is really frustrating.
122/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Bridgeland is working extremely hard to eliminate the criminal element and develop open areas for EVERYONE'S use. A slap in the face to the thousands of volunteers hours to develop ARP and vision for our future. I'm not really sure what the solution is for public consumption. Why can't people just smoke it outside where smoking is allowed. Don't want people congregating in one area to do it. Comments: either make it legal to smoke up and get wasted (booze, meth etc) in every single publi park in the city. Make people start a business to attract patrons to purchase and enjoy weed in their establishments, the same as as bar sells beer/cocktails why that site? why not in Gian Carlos neighbourhood. Yep. This should solely be a public space issue, either it’s allowed in every public space in the city or none. The same should go for booze. Hell why not make it ok to sell, buy and smoke crack in the parks.., you know it’ll end up being the same crowd! Dumb idea... It’s illegal to drink in public, this is the EXACT same situation with a different medium.. leave it to business establishments to capitalize and attract tax paying patrons.., or get your weed and smoke it at home like everyone else...brutal A public consumption park is unnecessary, a waste of resources and is infuriating an entire community against an already absent "councilor". Pot smokers are already smoking where ever they want, we don't have to subject the public to a concentrated spot that is heavily used by children. Canabis consumption sites are not the responsibility of the city. If people want to consume drugs or alcohol, they can do it at home or in restaurants where it is allowed. Creating permanent public spaces is invasive and restricts the enjoyability of Calgary’s already limited green spaces. I'd like to see public consumption of alcohol (European picnic style) come into effect in Calgary. Did you think about the irony that this used to be the site of Calgary General hospital? given the negative health effects of cannabis (which are significant) I don't think this is an optimal location. I choose not to live on top of a bar. I don't want to live on top of a cannabis site either. Why are 3 of the sites proposed are so close to each other? Bridgeland & Inglewood are within walking distance so it doesn’t make sense to me. Inglewood is better suited to have consumption sites. I propose a designated spot for smoking at city hall steps! You shouldn’t have a problem accommodating smokers if all areas at a common location like city hall!!! We are not ok having this in Bridgeland and feel we are being discriminated against by the proposal and have rights to say NO!!!!!!! Please don’t open one in Bridgeland. I am concerned on how it will be policed to ensure compliance. The absolute worst location possible. I don't want to smell pot everyday from house. Nor do I want to see people looking down into my house all day everyday. It's a family friendly location. Not a cannabis smoking location. Why not just make it a cigarette and drinking location as well? Please actually consider this one. I understand that people in apartments need a place for this, but there are better options. Look at the examples in other cities please.
123/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Why would you even consider using this popular family and community park for the consumption of intoxicants? There is a risk of this site being used for the congregation of criminal and vulnerable people. Bridgeland is already challenged by criminal activity and vagrancy. Please rethink this idea! Strongly opposed. Why do we need them? Where exactly do you think the condo dwellers that smoke are smoking now? Are they going to drive there to smoke a joint and then drive home...high? Not likely. And if we don’t have public consumption sites for alcohol, then why pot? People are so stupid about pot. If you are going to limit where people can consume, then make more than 3 designated areas. People smoke cigarettes on the street, and can go into a bar every 10 feet. It is also odd that City council would think there will be a "rush" for Calgarians to smoke marijuana just because it is legal. If you are a user of the product now - you probably already smoke it where you want. If you don't use marijuana now - I don't imagine you're going to start using it. Nope. Looks good. Could the plaza in front of General Ave be considered an even better spot? Currently there are many butt trays & almost never any children. People congregate here, & I see this becoming less of a †œsmoke pit― and more of a European style gathering. It is âœthe Piazza― afterall, complete with take out I don’t feel that the City of Calgary has any responsibility to individuals that wish to use cannabis for recreational purposes that currently reside in buildings where the landlord or condo board prohibit such use. How would the city police this space? Legally purchased, no minors, etc People use this park to enjoy the fresh air, and to walk their dogs and cats, especially those living in apartment buildings. Why spoil the fresh air? None. Not interested in out of home marijuana use. No one is going to get a ticket for consuming in public any old place. I dont see why one needs to invite people to congregate in this area. Unnecessary. It will upset multitudes more people than it will benefit. is it on a bus route? Please reconsider this as being a suitable location for cannabis consumption. This is a terrible location, as this is a family and public park for our children!! Moreover, there will be significant health related issues if this location is chosen, given this unnecessary smoke around our children. Smoking cannabis Should Not occur in public parks. Period. Just No. no I cannot express my disbelief that this site would even be considered! This site is a place that is used by young families for picnics, watching games in the field and for tobogganing in the winter! I often go on walks with my nephews here. I am vehemently opposed to this area as a site!!! Please listen to the people who live in the community. They do not want this. Regardless of their feelings about legalization. I understand the dilemma. But I don't think that the general Bridgeland Community Centre area is the appropriate area for it.
124/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
There should not be pot smoking areas since I will not be smoking it, I don’t want the second hand smoke or my children. It should remain a smoke-free Calgary which smokers are confined to their homes. Bad location and a super a resident I don't want this experiment in my backyard until the city does it's due diligence in outline how this will be policed and controlled when it gets out of hand and becomes a bigger problem for the residents I'm afraid to speak up to my community about why I think these spaces are a good idea because they've been incredibly opposed and closed minded and I don't want to become a target. Please advocate for people like me who are hard workers and active members of society who just want to chill sometimes. There are enough issues at this location with alcohol consumption, sleeping rough and public urination, this is not acceptable! I am in shock that this would even be considered a place to smoke, it will go into the park. Children play soccer all summer long there and you want to inflict them with the second hand smoke of this? You know you can get high that way as well right??? I am appalled this is even being considered. There are many other locations which are a safe distance away from children that could be used as a designated site for cannabis consumption. Please demonstrate some forward thinking by protecting our youth and continue to promote health and fitness in our parks not unhealthy habits! It is totally and completely unacceptable to even propose converting the primary play area in our community into a public drug use site, let alone approve doing it People need education on cannabis, it doesn’t harm anyone and people who use it don’t want to be around children or have them use it. People are up in arms about theses proposed consumption sites, overall really I don’t think we need them. Find somewhere else! This area is not even close to being appropriate, it's heavily used. There are children everywhere in this park, even in winter. I understand the purpose of it. But really, this area doesn't appear to have been researched AT ALL. Bridgeland has enough problems right now. Perhaps the city of Calgary could consider the same for public parks where alcohol can legally be consumed as well. I’ve just returned from Europe and it never ceases to amaze me on how differently we treat consumption of alcohol in public spaces. A picnic in a park with wine would be very nice. If this has to happen, which I don't believe it does, then it has to go somewhere else. A worse spot could not have been chosen. It really appears no research into this area has been done. Bridgeland has enough problems right now. We really don't need to be adding to the mix. While I understand that the City is trying to deal with a complicated issue, this is a terrible location. Residents, especially kids, do not need to be exposed to the second hand marijuana smoke while enjoying the park. I live in Crescent Heights East. We try to support Bridgeland as they are on the front line for issues related to Drop-in Centre clients - and there are many. Why are you even considering putting in these smoking sites at all? Allow businesses to operate cafes as they do in Europe. Look beyond. Where is the sense in this? And if proposing, propose one for every neighbourhood across the city.
125/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
No Keep consumption sites in industrial areas so people are not exposed to 2nd hand cannabis smoke in their own home where children play. I appreciate that our community has been chosen to test concept out, an I am in total support of it. Please consider the neighbours and the concerns we are raising. We have been working so hard in Bridgeland/Riverside to turn the area into more functional, positive gathering spaces - we just don't need this here. Let the businesses/cafes/bars deal with allowing folks spaces to consume cannabis. Not in my back yard... We have worked hard as a community to encourage young families to make Bridgeland their home instead of moving their growing families to suburban neighbourhoods. This decision (to have a canabis smoking area) will likely reverses the trend again...
4 locations across a city of 1.2 million goes against all the previous decisions made around cannabis (like land use distance rules to avoid over saturation). I believe council needs to consider more sites or none at all. It's unrealistic to put that much pressure on 4 locations. Poor plan that does not have my support. Bridgeland is getting sketchier by the day and this will do nothing to reverse this trend. The community is working very hard to make it beautiful, vibrant and safe. Sadly, [personal information removed] seems determined to squash these efforts. If there needs to be a pot smoking area move it to a central location such as Prince’s island. This would make more sense. If the city has no problem putting a pot smoking area in the middle of communities where kids are playing, growing and learning then Prince’s island would be a great fit for all Please don’t put it here. In addition to my safety concerns, I personally do not want to be exposed to cannabis smoke in my neighbourhood. I would like to see the designated areas for all smoking (cannabis and otherwise) enclosed so as to minimize pollution as well as the risk for unintentional consumption. Find a spot near 17 ave, that's where the pubs are. frankly I am concerned about my safety and the safety of others. Do not understand how it will be policed and monitored - and it needs to be!!! Frankly if I can’t consume alcohol in the park why would individuals be able to consume cannabis there? What about the impact on property values? Why none in the N.W.? Only the south/central get smoking areas? It seems ridiculous to have a public outdoor area for this - we don't for alcohol. i understand that not all rentals/hotels allow smoking of cannabis. If that's the case, they should find a new rental if that's what they want to do. should we host public housingfor pets, where rentals don't allow? I am in favour of taking the City of Edmonton's approach. As has been widely stated, there will not be an influx of cannabis consumption in public following legalization. This is a solution looking for a problem. No
126/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
You need to make mobile sites in the downtown area, in front of City Hall would be perfect. We love our Murdock public park and space that people and families use year around. I am especially concerned that pre-dominantly westerly winds may impact the playground downwind. This location is also roughly within one or two blocks of a primary school. I am not opposed to the concept of a public area for cannabis users who might be prevented from smoking in rental accommodations. It's purely the location that is utterly unacceptable. Pot smokers already know how to smoke and not be a nuisance as it's been illegal. Legalization will not be creating any significant number of new smokers that will need a designated spot to smoke. This is nanny state gone wild. Enough riff raff floats over the bridge into Bridgeland from downtown already. Let's not exacerbate the problem. Bridgeland and Renfrew are eclectic communities. Efforts to preserve this uniqueness shouldn't be compromised by designating our green space in this way. This is about recreational use. Without designated public areas, people aren't forced to break the law. Non-medicinal use is a choice. Let the marketplace figure out indoor solutions if there is sufficient demand. I support the city's decision to prohibit public use of cannabis. 1. Having alcohol available in designated parks is one thing and virtually impossible to patrol as would a Canibus park. 2. Canibus in all forms for public should be handled in lounges bars etc. In doors. Council should be pushing federal laws for this approval and waiting on outdoor programs
Nope No there should be no public consumption allowed. Just like alcohol this should not be allowed publicly. I do not want my kids to see public consumption of pot or alcohol. Neither is acceptable publicly. This is a nice park with a nearby trendy area. I think it's a good fit for a consumption providing a quiet green space for consumers/users. Why a park with there are a ton of kids and athletic events and weddings? Why ruin such a good place. Worst idea EVER!!!!!! You can't be serious about this?? There is a lot of places where you can garden your cannabis I don't want this in my hood! 1. Did you consult CBE? 2. Did you consider that having a designated "pot spot" may well become a designated "party zone" and bring other activities to the area? How will the area be confined? how can you ensure that the waste receptacles and ashtrays will be used? how will the city ensure compliance? Police have said they would not be monitoring the area. The City can't seem to help the neighbourhood with it's ongoing issues with drug users and others It is inappropriate to have park spaces for smoking pot. You would not approve public parks for drinking alcohol, except by permit. Rules should be similar to alcohol except more stringent. Minors should not be in a position to be exposed to the smoke. Consider licensing a coffee shop for this. Please don’t put a site in bridgeland at all.
127/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Do not allow it. Smoke dope in your own home not where children and families are affected by the drug users. Why this place? Make it larger? I disagree with all proposed locations. You want to smoke/vape "cannabis" then do it in the privacy of your own home. Until there are strict & upheld laws ensuring I/my children don't have to be exposed to the "cannabis" walking, rafting, living,driving & seeping through my apt walls - I am OPPOSED! I would really encourage the city to re-hunk the whole plan of having concentrated cannabis consumption sites at all. I don’t really understand the rationale. If there does need to be consumption sites, I am happy for one to be in Bridgeland, but not in a place where there is a high dog traffic I’m against it, I live on that street. It could encourage the illegal sale of drugs, it will likely cause people to congregate who do other drugs and I don't want people driving in my nieghborhood stoned Are these areas actually going to be policed? If not, then there should be a location in every community so the these don't become de facto gathering grounds. Why Bridgeland? We are trying to move forward, clean up, this would be a set back. We have a higher ratio of families than in downtown areas. Is this a case of vested interest? We don't have hotels, so 'visitors' won't benefit. Redevelopment committee wanted art here - don't think this counts. People visiting will most likely be hanging out downtown and staying in hotels...this proposed location is not close to either. I think it is a bad idea to have public smoking areas - we don't have public drinking areas except in controlled spaces. much prefer idea of amsterdam style coffee shops for consumption. If need open spaces, should be downtown plazas/shopping centres not residential areas. need to protect kids! Any location like this is a silly idea. Like any substance where adults are the target users, it needs to be like a bar. An inside or partially inside space where IDs can be properly checked, no minors, away from the public and with the regular restrictions. This shouldn’t be a free-for-all people! No People can smoke outside their homes but thank goodness smoking has declined in recent years so we are not impacted so much anymore. In my opinion pot use should be restricted to home use- why on earth would anyone want to smoke this stuff outside anyway. I hope its a fad that will go away. The community works hard to activate this space, keep it family and pet friendly. Our green and park space is already choked out thanks to all of the multi-family development here. You're eliminating yet another space for residents to enjoy. [personal information removed] is sacrificing our neighborhood for "pot votes" How large will the area be? Will you get tickets for being out of the zone and by how many feet? What if there are... 100 people there? do area's get expanded or contracted based on population? is this a test site? Are you allowed to bring chairs? How do loitering laws work here? What if a per Waste of time and tax payer money
128/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Yes, I would like to know who brought this forward? a group, an individual? a politician? I believe this type of activity is to be done in the privacy of a personal residence. I don't mind the act of drinking or smoking but not in public spaces where children are present. Why is [personal information removed] creating a solution to a problem that doesn't exist? The marijuana users (renters, visitors) will continue to smoke as they would today - before it's legal - finding a way to smoke that best suits them. These locations are a waste of time. Where are my beer consumption sites? This is a solution to a problem that isn't real yet. The city should wait and see where the pain points are before deciding if locations like this are even needed. Then determine where the need is greatest. This likely won't be the ideal location, so the community pushback and angst isn't worth it. Our community has enough negative issues going on and doesn't need to be the 'guinea pig' for another potential one. I don't believe the City needs to provide a consumption space. How big of a zone is it (diameter, area)? It just appears as a tiny dot. Yes, are there going to be restricted hours on these sites? I question why a park that is always used by families, sports teams and school children would even be considered. I like the idea of having consumption sites as we need to find out if they’ll be used. how and why was this location chosen as it does not meet the standards? Cannabis consumption should be treated the same way as alcohol. If I can't consume a glass of wine in the park why should I be able to consume cannabis. Concerned about the kids that play in the green space. hate the smell Parks obviously did not measure the distances. Contrary to [personal information removed]'s website, it is not more than 50 m from the nearest residence. If the city funds pot smokers because they can't smoke on their balconies the City opens itself to funding BBQ sites for those not allowed to BBQ on their balconies This park is a central point for the community including the community centre and a wonderful playground. Even though the proposed area is on the other side families may be deterred from coming, a set back with all the work the community has done. This is an absolutely rediculous idea. This is a very bad idea and location. There is currently enough illegal drug and alcohol consumption in the area. Legal Cannabis is not going to instantly get rid of illegal drug trade and the social issues and illegal activity that accompany drug trade. Stop trying to force cannabis use into designated areas that most pot smokers won’t follow anyhow We do not use public funds for creating designated public alcohol consumption areas & we should not do that for cannabis either. Alcohol can only be consumed at an establishment with a liquor license or in private residences. Cannabis should be the same. If you pass this I want to drink in the park. -Public funds should not be considered for developing cannabis usage but for decades public funds have not been used to create designated alcohol consumption areas in and around parks? -Alcohol is not permitted in public because people's behaviour changes so cannabis should also be banned. How high where you when you though this was a good idea?
129/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
-approving 4 designated cannabis areas within 3 communities close to downtown will deter families from moving to the inner city which is counter to the City's objectives -getting rid of the designated areas will be much harder once users get used to their right to consumption in public
-alcohol has not and will not have designated areas in the city. When someone passes by a person drinking their health is not impacted but the health of people in the park will be affected by the smoke from the cannabis designated area is they simply pass by How will the city regulate the use of drugs in this space? Is this enforceable? Who will enforce the rule? At what cost to the community is the city allowing this to happen? How willful is the city to allow property values to deminish as a result? Why is the city ok to increase condo fire risks? How would the area be marked? How would it be monitored? It is completely ludicrous that this location has been proposed by our [removed]...he obviously does not pay attention to community activities in our family-friendly neighborhood. Too close to school, too close to playground, too close to homes. Please, please, please reconsider. This should never have been made an option! If it’s festival based, like a beer garden, I understand that but an open consumption site 24/7 is a death sentence for any community that participated. If this area does get approved, how will security increase in the vicinity? How will the city ensure it is weed only and not other illegal substances? Continuing from above... Do you see the pictures of families? Children? How does a crowd of people smoking marijuana fit in there? How was it decided that was a good match? No matter how many garbage cans and ashtrays you place, people will still litter. It will make a mess of the area. No, but I'm not looking forward to the proliferation of cannabis shops all over the city People should smoke their pot at home, no one needs to be inhaling that skunk smelling substance. Second hand smoke. DUI Public Intoxication
Was nearby hillside Dog off leash area considered? Was children's use of this area considered? Pot is consumed in most communities already. Pot smokers will continue to find a way to pursue their recreation pot so city should not worry about it. So many other more meaningful priorities 2 address I would like to see this area moved to another neighborhood with less population of young families. its a public park please stop offering public parks for cannabis and allow a limited number of bars or coffee shops to be specially designated to smoke pot create a special permit with a limit on how many can be operated otherewise let people smoke in their back yards. Who cares? If they can't smoke in their apartment they should just bake brownies, as it is better for their lungs! This is a non-issue, move on to more important issues! How are you going to police this issue to ensure that the rules are followed. I am 100 percent against any form of smoking in public spaces. That also goes for alcohol consumption in city parks.
130/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Allowing this use in a public open space is not allowing citizens like me to enjoy the limited open space we have in a high density area - that will only become more so. If I want to see people get high I can go to a bar - if I chose not to I don't. As a tax payer I value this open space Not a good location, in the middle of an intense residential neighbourhood. I understand from neighbours - that, until recently, the box for the comment forms was not locked. How does the city know that forms were not removed? people can find other forms of the product to consume if they need it for medical reasons ... it is not necessary to polite the air in public places. use specialized Cafe's where consumption is allowed or place at grassy areas near roads and over passes where few people walk and air is already dirty I don't have a problem with a public consumption site. I just want to highlight that children would be close to this area. It makes no sense to me that in a city as large as Calgary there are four public pot smoking areas proposed, all in the same ward. Why does council feel this ward needs pot areas when no others do? I think this needs to be addressed publically because it feels as though decisions are being rushed. It is not pleasant to be around the smell of cannabis - it carries very well. I would hate to live close to this street. It's not pleasant to be around people getting high. Also, we already have a problem with homeless people in Bridgeland-Riverside and this would not be helpful. I am not opposed to the idea in theory, however I don't think this is an appropriate location. Also, I have doubts that it will be used as intended. In addition to concerns about children nearby, I worry about its use by the population who already frequent the area doing drugs and illegal activity I AM AGAINST IT COMPLETELY. THE SMOKING AREA SHOULD BE PLACED NOT TO WHERE PEOPLE ARE LIVING SO CLOSE BY IT. To close To a church,playground, walking trails, sport field, and a school that’s Students walk passed this proposed Site to sports field for PE classes. Please Consider and respect our neighborhoods safety and put us first not cannabis users!
There are already serious concerns about PEDESTRIAN and vehicle SAFETY in Bridgeland (crossing Edmonton Tr @ Meredith Rd, various points along 1 Ave NE, 9 St & McDougall Rd, 10 St between 4 & 8 Ave, etc.) Please don't make it worse by inviting cannabis users to drive in our community.
It's unnecessary to have public cannabis consumption areas. We don't have public alcohol consumption areas and are limiting smoking, as we should. How can a proposed cannabis consumption areas be so close to schools, playgrounds and playing fields? I am vehemently opposed to this.
131/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I have no clue why this location was picked. It will just create a nuisance issue to the community, and cannabis consumption should be kept within a private property. If the residents who have issue to find a place to consume, then they should leave Alberta. Restrictive consumption zones are creating dangerous conditions for cannabis consumers by forcing them to one area, facing them to drive impaired or consume illegally. Absolutely do not support this location. It very much risks one of the best aspects of Bridgeland for young families and for the wider community Just because cannabis is de-criminalized doesn't mean it is legitimized, or that its users have a "right" to use it that the City must protect. The City's proposal has put the interests of marijuana users ahead of the interests, health and wellbeing of the public. Smoking cannabis is not like smoking cigarettes. Getting high in public with smoking that can carry to othera should not be acceptable. why is it being proposed at all? It is unsuitable in every way. If the general rule is no smoking in any public place it is for a good reason. Would you welcome this in your back yard? The entire project of public consumption areas is wrong-headed. We don't allow public drinking in parks - why encourage public marijuana spaces? Open bars that are dedicated to pot smoking. In Calgary some buildings, doctors office, ect don't allow people to smoke. Though people still do smoke in those areas.
I would appreciate if the government would start charging fines for anyone caught smoking in public places where it's not allowed so people can learn a lesson.
Rather than create these outdoor zones that are not wanted by residents and consumers alike, the City should direct its attention to determining how cannabis can be used in regulated indoor facilities like the Amsterdam "coffee" houses. I will be voting for anyone but [personal information removed] if this goes through. He obviously does not represent the interests of bridgeland/riverside. The combination of a public consumption site with the already approved cannabis stores in Bridgeland, combined with the nearby drop-in & rehab centre, park and playground, school and high crime rates in the area, we believe, is completely untenable. I am wondering when cannabis cafes/lounges will be addressed as a safe possibility. If people are allowed to consume liquor in safe establishments catered to drinkers I believe the same should be given to cannabis users, especially since it’s a safer substance. The need for such a "consumption area" is somewhat bewildering. We do not allow for the consumption of alcohol in public and I do not see how any such area benefits the city as a whole. Who will be responsible for cleaning this area and at what cost? This will create more problems than solutions. Provincial and federal governments don't even have a strong grasp on how to handle legalization. What's the hurry in considering this now? When you do it wrong from Day 1, how will it be corrected once the precedent is set? How long will that take?
132/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I think it is the best choice from the 3 sites. I do not agree at all with a public consumption area however if there must be one in our community, consider it being nearer to the ctrain station so that we do not also have inebriation while driving an issue. Consider the areas backing onto memorial drive that are out of view of playgrounds. I appreciate that this is difficult but people of all economic levels have the right to chose. Keep cannabis use out of public spaces - just like liquor! Please reconsider this proposal. I'm opposed to designated cannabis consumption areas anywhere in Calgary - this is NOT a NIMBY reaction. Setting aside parks for cannabis use simply doesn't make sense. How the area will be equipped and delimitated? Go to BARLOW/MAXBELL Arena Area the grassy hilly part and along the pathways for few bikers, joggers and walkers the tables, benches, far away from establishments and people and children, closer to CTRAIN station, safe Instead of driving when high, so quiet, GREAT AMBIANCE for smokers and party goer Why! Why! Why!?? Why this location you just stated criteria addressing locations proximity to sensitive land uses such as playground, residences etc. There is a church just steps away and a HIStorical place within the location. Spare the CHILDREN!!! Be FAMILY ORIENTED, please use our common sense I hope it works out smoothly!! Kudos to the City for being proactive. Why do we need consumption sites? If this is being legalized, shouldn't it have the same regulation as tobacco smoke? "Social Disorder" has tripled in average monthly incidents in the past 5 years based on Calgary Police Statistical Reports. Between 2012 and 2014 there was an average of 36 incidents per month compared to 91 between 2015-2017. Above on this page it states, "Potential areas are carefully considered through criteria addressing...proximity to sensitive land uses such as schools, playgrounds, and residences." How has this site been considered since it is by a playground, fields used for Tim Bits soccer, and a K-9 school? This location is also directly on a path used at night to get from the LRT into the neighborhood. This is not a well considered area and should not be designated as a consumption site. For not wanting to be near children, it sure seems like a place to put users on display of young children and teens This is a terrible place for it. Literally you decided to put it where young kids and teens from a school will see, possibly be encouraged, smell, and be affected by cannabis users in what is currently a safe and well used park area. Do not put a consumption site in Murdoch Park. Change it immediately. We bring families from all over the city to our clinic - we generate much income to the neighbourhood. Our client safety and happiness - and that of our staff - is paramount. No. Gian-Carlo needs to focus his efforts into things that matter. This feels purely like a PR scheme and people can see right through it. 3 day cares in community use pathway and site on a daily basis. Contravenes your own criteria - 100 m from areas intensively used by children, sport fields, or family friendly attractions. Not in area where other site users pass through to access part of site.
133/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
No public location is a good location to gather groups of people to consume cannibus. This councillor does not have the interests of his community members when proposing "designated" sites in heavily used public park areas! It seems like there should be more than 3-4 places in Calgary where cannabis use should be permitted (again as a non-cannabis user) and thanks for the change to provide my thoughts. If the Cannabis Consumption Bylaw is intended to provide citizens and visitors to Calgary a legal place to consume cannabis, will Council commit to suspend these consumption areas if cannabis cafes or lounges become legal in Alberta? Area seems out of the way; would not interfere with daily activities currently taking place in and around the area I feel like this is a very measured proposal which will benefit cannabis users and non-users alike. People will smoke cannabis publicly once it is legalized, bylaw or not. Please give well-meaning cannabis users an area where they can go and avoid people who want nothing to do with it. What about the rest of the city? If it is legal then how can you limit it like this? The city must advocate with the province to change the provincial guidelines/rules/legislation. TheDrugArea will not only attract weed smokers,but other types of drug users and sellers,resulting in increased crime .As well drug use area close to residential homes,weed smoke is pungent and travels aLong way,will effect the AirQualityOfSurrounding homes. You are out of touch with my concerns. There is no need for this privilege to pot smokers. The rest of us want smoke free environments especially in a park. Can't believe this is even considered. The City is wasting time and money exploring this bylaw. I support the legalization of marijuana. However, promoting city sanctioned consumption areas will cause some people to feel unsafe in and excluded from Murdoch Park and surrounding area. Very ironic for a policy aimed at inclusion. Do better. The proposed location is close by an LRT station and people under the influence of cannabis will likely be loitering at the public transport area and create disturbance to others. It will make it unsafe for the neighborhood and those that use the public transport. The smoke will also pollute the air who thought of this spot? seems to be an exceptionally poor choice, hard to undersatnd the thought process... how are family usage of proposed areas factored into the decision making I am strongly against this proposal in my community. I don’t think any of the proposed open cannabis areas are good for any communities. There is a potential of increased crime, violence, attracts the wrong crowd. If this proposal is passed, how will this be monitored and to what expense to tax payers? My biggest concern is that when a specific area becomes known for something in particular that may be harmful or illegal to minors, that itself becomes very attractive to minors. Why is this area chosen given it is right next to a soccer field and playground. Also given the proximity to a tobacco and liquor store (in general plaza).
134/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
This green space is for children, parents and dogs and has been forever and should not be altered Out of all proposed location, this is easily the best. High density, walkable from the downtown core and river pathway system. Reduced chance of impaired driving due to its central location. Beautiful views as this is a destination park anyways. I don't understand why cannabis cannot align with current alcohol rules. Why wouldn't there be cannabis "bars" that people can go visit. Calgary outlawed smoking in bars and on outside patios but is considering allowing cannabis use near an area where children play...we are moving backwards. It is too close to the Bridgeland community centre which has a playground for youngsters and host a variety of events for young and older people. Any consumption area in Bridgeland should be moved about 5 blocks East and 2 blocks South of this proposed location away from children who are very active None, looks like a very fitting location This proposal should not be considered due it close proximity to playground, soccer fields, toboggan hill and much used community park area. Lifestyle of the majority of residents (tax payers) should be given priority. I am worried about vagrants congregating more in the community. Have had multiple burglaries in our underground parkade already. Could turn into a meeting point for drug dealers for people who are not purchasing it legally. And with that, other harder drugs I am one of the many users of Murdock Park and am entitled to a smoke free outside environment. This activity would attract illegal ventures and panhandlers which would give the park an unsafe atmosphere and drive away recreational users of the park. Please find a better location! Not in a family park! Langevin school kids routinely go outside physical education. This location is too close to the community school grounds. Cannabis should not be consumed by children under 18 and it is inappropriate to model legal consumption to underage kids. My comments are that this would be unwelcome here. It is close to residential homes and would constitute a disturbance if people gathered around to smoke. There are no such "designated areas" for cigarette and alcohol so i strongly object to exposing the public to the impact of this proposal I just attended the BRCA open house on the matter. Given your setback map, how can you possibly think that there is any location in the Murdoch Park area that is appropriate? Have you actually been to the site? Why the rush? Is there really a need for this? What about the rest of Calgary? i feel that the community of bridge land is finally cleaning up and making some progress with being a safer neighbourhood , and now [personal information removed] is being inconsiderate with his proposal ...... i think its time to go [personal information removed] I don't understand the process that arrived at this location being recommended. The City of Calgary website indicated in-person engagement sessions were conducted, but my [personal information removed] website makes no indication of in-person opportunities to discuss, so I am providing feedback on-line.
135/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 it is a very poor location. The neighbour already struggles with issues along the hill in the area. I personally would not feel safe. The oder is offensive. This is a terrible initiative. It has needlessly polarized Calgarians and our community about an issue that was already fraught with tension. Sometimes "sticking your hand up" is not about leading; it's inciting. This has incited negative thinking; it is driving people apart; it will not help. Either designate public consumption areas in ALL neighbourhoods, or NONE of them. Please, not JUST in Ward 9. Also, does Langevin School routinely use the area for PE classes? That puts kids < 150 m away. I’d hate to see school use of the park area sacrificed for this.
Who will monitor the site for inappropriate behavior and intoxication? What is the exact location? Who will clean up the site? Who proposed this site and why? What are the criteria to protect children and pets from second hand smoke? There is a soccer field and play ground on site now. It is very poor public policy to have these sites. Those who smoke have smoked somewhere b4 . If private property it should be allowed unless there are neighbour complain, that should be part of the by- law. Public consump. shld be fined once legal. Using ward 9 as a pilot is a horrible idea. not sure how it meets the criteria laid out by city. Might have been helpful to assess the actual need before creating a "solution". Current use (playground, track training, toboggan hill, etc.) should not be altered to allow for this adult only area. This area is not necessary.There are already questionable people lurking around the area. Why would you introduce an idea like this and invite more opportunities for crime and drugs to enter the community.I don't think this [removed] truly cares for the people in the area. Why invite trouble? The needs of visitors should be second to local residents. So not until we know the impact of cannabis use as outlined above should we consider public consumption sites. It won’t hurt to wait. I dont want Bridgeland stigmatized as a "Pot Community" and I want to protect our children from exposure to second hand toxic smoke and the sight of drug users in our neighborhood. The proposed location should be moved about 5 blocks east and 2 blocks south of what,is being proposed currently. If people are to come to this location to participate in such activity, then their return journey may be of danger to the public due to time constraints from consumption to driving. Where would people park as space is limited by local residents. Murdoch Park is the recreational/activity center for Bridgeland/Riverside. I'm concerned about Murdoch Park becoming a citywide destination cannabis hotspot if this consumption area is approved. Perhaps there are other areas that would be more appropriate that aren't as crucial to Bridgeland. I think a better choice would be the plaza in front of general ave (The Piazza, CU#6, 951 General Ave NE) as there is a bit more foot traffic through this area, and a little less close to the playground. How large of an area will it be? Is it expected to be a fenced area?
136/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Please reconsider this proposal. You are trying to be more inclusive for some individuals but the end- effect will more likely be reducing access for the majority of the people who currently frequent that area of Bridgeland. Maybe consider east Bridgeland where less families frequent? The visuals show Murdoch Park and adjacent, contiguous parks. The park on the south end of 7a Street, which is on a partly wooded, grassy ridge, is a known site for drinking. Murdoch park is south of Centre Ave between 8 and 8a Streets and is a soccer pitch with frequent use by school children.
How was the proposed location picked? Were demographics of those under 25 looked at when the site was picked. I would like to know how the sites where chosen -- what considerations were taken into account. n/a I understand the reasoning behind having a designated cannabis consumption area- this is so close to a park. Perhaps nearer to condos and apartments would be better? Why not have smoking cafes. Smoke where you purchase like in the Netherlands. Have appropriate ventilation, etc. Otherwise smoke in your home/yard. If it is an issue for condo and apartment residents, they could probably smoke up wherever they smoke tobacco. Maybe condo boards need to designate areas of their roofs for smoking, if they already haven't. I am concerned about the choice of this location. It does not seem well thought out AT ALL in the least. There are other areas in the park that would make WAY more sense if you insist on choosing this park. Already so many problems with that little alley way that starts at the pot park site Why can we not just wait until the city approves proper pot cafes etc. We already have too many drunks and drug users drinking on public park benches and I feel this would further exacerbate the current problems we have and be an open invitation for further illicit dealings and drug use... The exact site is also used by many families from all over the city in the winter months for sledding and tobogganing. Making this a consumption site would eliminate this family activity from our city as what parent would want to go sledding with randoms getting high right next to their children There should be no public consumption sites, period. Ward 9 Councillor is creating a problem where none currently exists. Consumption should be a lease issue between landlord & tenant (like smoking and pets) not be made a public policy issue; private enterprise will step in soon. I think the areas should be piloted. Too many NIMBY residents are thinking about themselves and not the greater good. Having pot smoking normalized will be better for the masses who want to smoke it. There should be no concerns about kids getting access or proximity to the church. I am unclear as to why we were pick for this as this is a very family active area. Cannabalis Cafes away from businesses frequented by children/families would be better. Where in Bridgeland - I got no clue. WHY the promotion of use in areas. Or keep to smoking regulations. Why try to do something different????
137/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 no don't support it This area is frequently used by community members and school children. If cannabis is being granted special exemptions for use, why not also allocate for alcohol consumption? I disagree with this location. There is already enough drug and alcohol consumption in this area that the Calgary Police do not clean up. I see it every morning when I walk by. Adding it as a consumption site will only make it worse. The park on the south end of 7a Street, which is on a partly wooded, grassy ridge, is a known site for drinking. Murdoch park is south of Centre Ave between 8 & 8a Streets is a soccer area that has frequent use by school children. We want area safe for children, seniors to walk freely without fear. I am firmly against this proposal Do you know that cannabis users are actually looking for a dedicated area? and would cannabis users actually use it? Is this an answer for a problem that doesn't actually exist? Inconsistent with tobacco or alcohol consumption sites. If tenants, tourists, or others seeking a safe consumption areas are looking for places to consume, shouldn't this be left to the private sector? Cafe's or restaurants. Similar to bars, a place where you may consumer alcohol. The field beside this area is frequented by small children as well. Why does it need to here? Can private sites not fill this role? Concerned about people driving to the site to consume then driving away under the influence. Driving under the influence on roads that will be crossed by young childern I urge the City Council to consider another site where children / youth are not using the adjacent passing thoroughfares so frequently. Also a better area where cars can park easily and possibly pay for parking so that residents of Bridgeland can utilize the parking areas that are nearby Murdock PAr What other neighbourhoods are you proposing these sites in ? Elboya? My Royal? Bel Aire?? Just because something is becoming legal doesn’t mean that we need to make sites in our community where families, children, students, animals are in that vicinity all the time. It’s putting the horse before the course and trying to rush something just because. No other districts are doing this. At yesterday's town hall, it was made clear the disappointment and distrust in [personal information removed] actions. This news was just sprung on us with no due diligence or community engagement. What happened to the engagement process? Even the AHS is against this proposition in their letter to the city. Take your weed and smoke it somewhere away from bridgland. There are schools and parks very near to this location, is there a plan in place to enforce impaired driving where we have high densities of kids. Why is this area and other public, family spaces, being considered as designated cannabis use areas? Was council high when they approved this regulation? Concerned that there has not been appropriate consultation. This is public land for which public input should be considered. no justification for how this location satisfies the very criteria proposed by the City. also it appears that the City has no plans for responding to residents concerns.
138/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
You guys need to come up with another solution. Why can't you get the cafes or lounges approved? Also the smell of weed being smoked is noxious and disgusting - the effects of air pollution is not well- known, and the second-hand smoke associated is not well known. Please don’t do it. This area is Hevily used by lots of people mainly kids Please do not put this consumption area in our park. We are not against consumption areas, but we truly believe that this is not a viable location. As an active user of cannabis, this doesn’t make any sense. Users already have their locations to consume cannabis prior to legalization. A designated consumption spot will not be used by responsible cannabis users, it’s like a zoo, we don’t want go to a place so that people can identify us as user. It is UNACCEPTABLE to see the process and the proposal made without adequate consideration or consultation with residents. The overwhelming majority of residents strongly oppose this idea in Bridgeland. And personally, I now question the rationale and the sanity of the Councillor who put this forth.
No There is a school nearby Langevin, the students use the soccer field and area around the proposed site. I have also seen private yoga and exercise classes in the park. Exercise near a pot park what a good idea? No Undoubtedly litter will become more of an issue.What next to indulge these individuals-heated shelters? Who will monitor, check ID of users. Will dealers (black market) surface here.How much wildlife could be affected by consuming leftover/dropped edibles etc.I am EXTREMELY disappointed in council. Why was this proposed location selected with no consultation with the community? A very short window for engagement and it is very hard to say if any opinions other than the Councillor’s have any merit. This seems like a hasty proposal to address a problem that does not yet exist - cafes are coming. Don't need pot smoking areas. Just let people smoke pot where people smoke cigarettes I cross the street near the site almost daily with my family. I don’t want to deal with high people (intoxicated) walking and driving to from the site. Bars and restaurants are supervised for alcohol. There is no way to supervise this site. A security camera and help button is not enough.
Inglewood I (Green space at 11 Ave. S.E., between 11th and 12th St.)
1. How would this consumption area be of benefit to you?
It wouldn't. While it is the closest to my home in west Beltline, it is much too far from where I live to be beneficial. No. With a city as big as Calgary, the fact that there are only 4 sites (2 being in the same area) is idiotic. They need to be spread out with at least 1 per quadrant.
139/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
None whatsoever. I live in Bankview where you have nowhere for people to smoke cannabis but tobacco is ok. Ridiculous It would not benefit me at all. I fail to see how public consumption sites benefit anybody and why you are considering any. I could consume cannabis here no close to downtown. it has the highest density population of any area. Good location for Inglewood. Increase my civic pride At least kids don't play there? I don't see the benefits for me or my family.
It is the closest option to my house It would not. As I do not live in that area. It would bring more people to the area, could see more activity/events. It would not benefit me personally It is close to home and would not require me to drive to get there It would not N/A I do not live in the Inglewood neighborhood. However I regularly attend community events here. I am a non-drinker and having a consumption site in the area is a great alternative for me other than the "beer-gardens" This would benefit me as it would allow me to medicate outside. the more freely we can consume in nature the better Designated areas are important! No It wouldn't It would provide an accessible space for those who want to smoke cannabis to do so. Too far away. It wouldn't other than the areas will be trashed after a period of time and it will make the general public to go by these areas I don’t think it would be Great! In the heart of the barley belt add it to the list of tourism attractions in Inglewood!
No benefit A medical patient, it would be nice to friendly public spaces to consume outdoors on a nice day.
140/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
No benefit no! please do not put a public consumption area here
Nothing! This is a really silly idea, not just this site, but all. It would not, detriment to the public Prefer area 2 This is a terrible idea. There are kids running around in this area. And they are not supposed to be exposed to these things at such early ages. Very little benefit, I do not plan to consume cannibis. There are no benefits to an open area of consumption Good location In no way, shape or form, will a weed park benefit me as an individual or my family. All consumption areas are a waste of time and money. Cannabis user's wont go out of their way to smoke in a designated area. Instead they will do it wherever they want, just as they currently do. Legal or Illegal it doesn't make a difference. dnt fgt win None of the locations would benefit me at all. i have to travel 20 minutes to consume. what a stupid idea It would give me a place to smoke the tweed There is absolutely NO benefit to me or my family. No. This entire plan is ridiculous. This is a good start. There should be public consumption across all of Calgary would not benefit me personally but nice to see a spot for downtownies to puff if needed. i think it adds to the negative stigma and that Cannabis is and should be compltely normalized. Propaganda has demonized an extremely beneficial plant. Educate. ill be smoking where cig smokers smoke thanks None. this wouldnt benefit me in anyway as i dont go to this area of the city at all. No benefit It would ensure that I completely avoid Inglewood going forward. no benefit I shop and go for lunch in Inglewood pretty often. This would be a convienent location to shopping and restaurants. What about individuals living in suburbs? Are they expected to drive long distances to go to either of the three sites? Not at all Close for me to visit
It would not It's not a benefit. There should be no public sites for getting high.
141/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It wouldn't. it would not dont smoke it There is no benefit to utilizing public spaces for drug use It wouldn't. Consumption areas are ill advise and reckless, forcing people to go long ways out of the route to in digest a legal drug is board line criminal. You force people to drive to and from the areas increasing the amount of stoned drivers. It would not I will consume in my own home it would mnot It is a central location that will give tourists a safe place to consume legally. This will benefit businesses in the area and will limit people consuming in other public areas. No benifit Decently far from residential. It would not This is the most ridiculous item you have proposed. Please DO NOT ALLOW ANY CONSUMPTION AREAS!!!!! It wouldn’t. It won’t Not have it at all bringing the smell, and issues associated with smoking marijuana I completely disagree with any consideration for a public consumption area. Alcohol cannot be consumed in public places, why make an exception for cannabis. Provide a location for consumption while in the area It would not benefit me at all. I don’t live close so I would have to drive there and back home. Driving home would , of course, be illegal. I would not use public transit to go smoke pay and taxi/Uber fares would be prohibitive. No benefit. It wouldn’t. You expect people to go stand in a park in -20. You need to have pot pubs. I would prefer no public space Inglewood is a great place to visit on the weekends for me. Having a welcoming place for myself and tourists to use cannabis would be great. This wouldn't benefit me as I am a non-smoker/drinker and am also a homeowner. I rent and as such will have no legal place to smoke cannabis if the need/want should arise. this would allow me to occasionally consume without risking either breaking the law or being evicted. of no benefit None It wouldn’t. It is not very accessible from my apartment. Would only use if I happen to be in the area. Not at all
142/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It wouldn’t be. It wouldn’t what is wrong with you people Not at all No benifit None It wouldn't. Why on earth do we need pot parks, this should all be treated as you would alcohol. There isn't booze parks, you cant consume booze in public why should you be able to smoke weed in public? It wouldn't It wouldn’t be a benefit and I don’t see why we would. We do not have booze parks. No It would not be if any benefit to me None i lived in inglewood 36 years and am very happy about the proposed comsumption sites, how ever i think it should be smokeable anywhere tobacco is, i think tobacco should have to be out of the public as well, it is a proven carcinagin and pot is not NONE WHATSOEVER. THIS IS A MAJOR NUISANCE. It wouldn't None There is no benefit to me or anyone. No not at all, I don't get stoned. No, not at all. No benefit Absolutely no benefit! There is no benefit to anyone! It will not. I think the city needs to decide whether they allow public consumption or not. Doing it like this adds significant ambiguity. If it is to be treated like alcohol, then treat it like alcohol. I can’t have a wine in a park, why weed? This consumption area would be of no benefit to me. It would negatively impact my life. It does not benefit me. There would be NO BENEFIT to me from making this a consumption area. Not a wit because I will continue to smoke pot on the street, in my car, by the river, outside of pubs and bars within 20 feet of the doors, in superstore parking lots, just as I have for 40 years and counting. No amount of governance will ever stop this It wouldn't No benefit at all it would have no benefit and would actually be a big detriment to the community It wouldn’t. I oppose this pilot project. It wouldn't
143/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
This area wouldn't necessarily benefit me but i love the idea of allowing a public place to be pot friendly It would not. I think this is not a good idea at all. It would not benefit me or my community. not personally. I have absolutely no interest in smoking myself. If it would be used, and keep smokers out of other areas, it woudl benefit me, since I get sick from being exposed to the smell of cannabis smoke/fumes (to the point of dizziness /vomiting) Not at all It would improve the overall greasiness of the area by increasing it. Its not its. This is a detriment There is absolutely no benefit to public consumption at all As I live in the deep S.W. it doesnt help me other than to get the ball rolling seriously we need a hundred or more of those sites under current legislation. It wont benefit me but I believe it will be beneficial and a nice place to enjoy it Would not at all. This is a [offensive language removed]ing joke and an insult. Yes No benefit. I am against having any consumption areas. Cannabis consumption should be treated the same as alcohol consumption. No It will show how braindead you people are when it comes to cannabis. No benefit. Away from 9th Avenue shops It would be of no benefit. Consumption of cannabis should not be allowed. To have somewhere to go to consume It wouldn't. Makes no sense. Should be able to smoke freely This entire proposal is ridiculous It would not be of any benefit and it would be detrimental to the community. No. I do not smoke cannabis. It won’t. What a stupid idea. It would not benefit, it will actually have a negative effect. The smoke lingers for days and it will impact people walking by or living nearby. It would not. I would feel like a teenager again.. Very well! It is part of my daily commute and easy access from the northwest. It would not there is no cover. Have you idiots in office just gotten so delusional you forgot about winter it is okay until real lounges are built. I can smoke weed anywhere you can smoke cigs, I don't recognize your right to tell me where i can smoke None, all the proposed areas are too far away. It will force people to drive intoxicated. We need public spaces
144/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I would not benefit me or the neighborhood. Why in the world would it be a benefit to the neighborhood??? It won’t No Would not I see no need for public consumption areas and do not support such areas for cannabis use. It quickly becomes a hang out in the neighborhood, quickly followed by littering and a place for dealers to peddle their other drugs and wares. Businesses in immediate area (2 retail breweries) are adult oriented, area not regularly used by children. NO TO ALL None to me or anyone else. Cannabis users should not be allowed to use cannabis in public areas would not benefit me for any area of the city It would be nice to be able to use of marijuana but if it’s legal why say you can use but only where we tell you it is stupid. It's a bit far from where I live and I know a lot of others live.. It would NOT! I am completely opposed to public cannabis consumption sites in any areas of Calgary! I’m even concerned about neighbours consumption in their yard which will impact me! It would not benefit me. it wouldn't It will NOT be in my neighborhood None. It will encourage smoking pot and driving for people to get to these spaces. No It wouldn't be It would not No This would be a deterrent and I would not go to the park. Absolutely no benefit It’s not no, can use my own backyard. A good location, close to Restaurants & pubs who can walk to a designated spot. None at all i think the whole idea of these proposed sites is dumb. People are going to do what they want as I think it will be impossible to enforce these regulations. Let peopke smoke pot the same as cigarettes. That makes the most sense to me. Thank you. None It would not.
145/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It’s not. I’m a medical cannabis user. So a Medical Canabis patient has to drive, walk, wheelchair x amount of Kms in a car, taxi, train in snow or rain just to take his/her proscribed medication? No It would serve the community and is within walking distance and has easy access to transit It does not benefit me or the community, if it is being treated like alcohol and tobacco there should not be a public consumption site and exactly how are you planning to police these? bylaw does not have the resources nor do the police Why only ask for input on 3 areas and not on the whole broader issue? Not in any way. It wouldn’t and I can’t believe this is even being considered. Not at all No identifiable benefit. Why no locations in the densest part of the core (ie. Beltline?) No benefit It allows just one area where people can enjoy a helpful plant without the Reefer Madness BS about it. No benefit No benefit no direct benafit or hinderance Totally against this. Tax payers money can be spent else where. None. NO benefit none at all would not I'm fortunate in that it would be close to my home, though I find this to be an extremely guided question - what about cannabis users who are driving around the area? Close to my home. Wonderful location. It won’t. Like me, most cannabis consumers will get their #ACMPR license and the Cannabis Consumption Bylaws do not apply to those with a Federal exemption, which is Charter- protected. No It wouldn't. I don't believe there are any benefits to restricting consumption to specific areas of inglewood. it wouldn't I can listen to the sweet, soothing sound of freight trains while I consume a supposedly legal product in public, surrounded by strangers. I enjoy spending time in Inglewood, shopping on 9th avenue, so it would be relatively convenient It wouldn't, but given it's adjacent to two breweries and such, the added attention CPS is likely to give this are is totally unwelcome.
146/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It is of no benefit to me but there should be more Great, I could drive there and fly back home. Duh! It won’t benefit me. There should be no public consumption sites at all. Anywhere. Just like there are no designated public alcohol consumption sites and no public sites to engage in sexual acts. Provide a legal space to enjoy cannabis. Though I doubt I would personally use it, I think the proximity to commercial areas and (likely) dispensaries makes complete sense and would be of benefit to the neighbourhood. This site is not near me, and hopefully having this site will keep exposure to myself and family to a minimum. I have no interest in using, inhaling or smelling cannabis. Far from my home it wouldn't. I need a consumption point but all of the proposed are too far. Am I expected to drive to and from intoxicated? because I highly disagree with driving under the influence Perfect central location in a lovely trendy area close to my home. Don't plan to use cannibis It would not at all I would not find it of any use personally, but understand the law and the issue it provides. This consuption area would not be a benefit to me. I see only a negitive impact. I am against setting up outdoor spaces for public consumption. I am against smoking or comsuming alcohol in public.It would have a negitive affect on residental properties It is of zero benefit to anyone having pot smoking areas set up anywhere in Calgary or elsewhere. Politicians look at the money they think they will be making getting into the drug business, while parents are trying to keep their kids away from drugs. yes It may be of benefit to me to meet others in a social setting with marijuana. No It's too far away. It would be of no benefit to me. Close to my home The number 1 bus driver isn't going to be happy. Will there be handwarmers in winter? People will just sneak it at home if there isn't a comfortable alternative. This will not benefit me or any of the residents in my area of Inglewood or Calgary. Why would we give up a green space for pot smokers when people are not allowed to drink alcohol in parks. Pot bars/restaurants will open soon to serve pot smokers. It doesn't really, but Inglewood is a great destination for tourists. It wouldn’t- to me or to anybody for that matter- it’s a ridiculous idea. It wouldn’t benefit me at all but it’s a good trial space for public cannabis consumption. No Benefit what so ever It provides a space similar to a bar where people can come together and engage. It would not benefit anyone. People would feel singled out having to use it.
147/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It wouldn't, and could be detrimental to walking, even parking in the community It would be of no benefit to me. It will not benefit me at all burn infringe on my right to breathe clean air and to not be affected by a drug. Absolutely no benefit No Not benefits at all! This is an incredibly dumb idea, the quarter of a million people who plan to try weed (your data) have 4 locations where they can smoke it? This law is dumb and it needs to be treated exactly the same as tobacco. Since it will be enforced as if it was. If I choose to smoke cannabis it would be convenient when I’m out letting loose at one of the 6 or so bars within a 1 minute of this site. not at all It would not be. My family walks past this area often. With a 7 year old child. There are no sidewalks on the east side of 12th so walking south on 12th to 11th would be impossible without exposing my child to this area and it’s occupants. It would not benefit me or my family at all! Any space would be a benefit as i have few other options by the sounds of it It would not be any benefit. None whatsoever No benefit only detriment No benefit Would not benefit me. It is a hazard. Terrible idea!! For obvious reasons!! How can this even be an option?? No I don’t mind the idea of consumption sites, there is no personal benefit to us. Could be the catalyst for more restaurants via †œthe munchies!! ✠I frequently visit in and around the area myself and with my family that includes young children. It would be of no benefit
Great location, I would have the benefit of easy access to future Green Line station, and multiple breweries within steps. Good common use of this space (alcohol and pot consumption go hand in hand). There are no schools/playgrounds within close proximity None whatsoever. No benefit whatsoever No benefit whatsoever No Very beneficial, I love that it is central Close
148/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 no benefit. It wouldn’t. It would only deter me from going to this community for walks or shopping or dining. I don’t want to fight through the stench and smoke to enjoy my city. It would be a good night out in Inglewood with nearby bars and other places to go. It wouldn't - this is a ridiculous idea. No Would not benefit me at all. This would not benefit me in anyway. There are not enough sites in the city. People are not going to drive or take the bus somewhere just to consume cannabis. It is unrealistic and will create future problems. I am opposed to these sites. I have nothing against the legalization of cannabis, but do not agree with a park being used for its consumption. Alcohol cannot be consumed in public parks - neither should cannabis should cannabis. No benefit, but better site than Wildlands Park site. Have a beer and a puff across the street but I doubt people would even bother crossing the street. Not at all. I would ahve to drive there. No No benefit. Not at all Not at all I cannot see any pot park being a plus for this city. No one ever suggested setting aside a smoking park for regular cigarettes that I recall. This whole idea is rediculous I think. It wouldn't. I am not interested in consuming canabis myself but I have many friends who are. They would all have to drive a great distance to get to any of these. Probably not safe to drive home after. Not of benefit No benefit Not at all. It would be of no benefit to me. No benefit to me - I am not a consumer and don't plan to be It wouldn't. I don't honestly think it would benefit anyone. I think this idea is a waste of money an time. Very few people will travel to use these spaces. None. See next question. This would not be a benefit, it would be a detriment. No benefit. I live in a house, so could safely and legally consume cannabis at home. It would, it’s far away from me It is a detriment to the area. Zero benefit Absolutely no benefit.Unless you consider trash, traffic noise, property damage, criminal behavior, and loss of the peaceful enjoyment of your neighborhood desirable. Is there an
149/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 entrepreneur somewhere that can smell a dollar to be made? Food trucks, taxis, hookers? Sounds like a nightmare to me. It will not benefit me or our family in any way. I repeat it will not benefit me or my family or anyone's family! This is a total waste of tax dollars that should go towards schools and hospitals. It wouldn’t. I’m not interested in this space being designated as such. It wouldn't. In no way would this consumption area benefit me. Near my residence Won't you need one of these designated spots at the end of every block? Trying not to generalize, but I haven't noticed that consistent pot smokers are overly motivated individuals. It seems unlikely that they will travel across the city to a designated area when they want a puff It wouldn't, None over the proposed areas do.. No there should be no public consumption allowed. Just like alcohol this should not be allowed publicly. I do not want my kids to see public consumption of pot or alcohol. Neither is acceptable publicly. I frequent the Cold Garden Brewery and occasionally walk through Inglewood Close to the business district and breweries. Easy to pop over there for a permissible puff on an evening out! This consumption area would be of NO benefit to me, my family, my friends or anyone! It would not be of benefit to me. No Unbelievable. How can you guys really make such a big deal about NOTHING. You have dogs running all over the damn places in this city and those bike paths are a huge problem and COST tax payers dearly and now where to consume pot REALLY you guys are PATHETIC. not at all! It would benefit me by being down wind from my home. I don't know It wouldn’t. I live near Inglewood but not in it. This means I’d have to travel to this destination to administer my prescription marijuana. More than likely it would be by vehicle which after consumption would potentially make me a criminal on the drive home. I live in Alice Bissett Place in Inglewood, and think this is a very bad idea. It will not benefit me at all, it will actually make living in Inglewood less enjoyable and safe. These types of parks won't even be safe for pot smokers. Why would the city do this? It’s ridiculous I love the area and visit Inglewood a lot BUT I feel that there needs to be WAY more consumption areas throughout the city. I live on the opposite side of downtown from Inglewood and I DO NOT want to have to go all the way there to consume what will be a legal product on October 17th Absolutely of no benefit.
150/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
This is unacceptable and way too close to residents and businesses It wouldn't benefit me. In no way. It would not be of benefit, conversely it could create problems. How will levels of consumption be monitored? What will be done to prevent this turning into a hangout for stoned people? At this point, I don't see this site as either a benefit or detriment to me personally. I do not and will not consume cannabis so these public consumption sites will not benefit me. It would NOT! zero it would be of no benefit, it would take away from the use of the park by families. In no way shape or form would this area be of benefit as a site It wouldn’t It provides a legal outdoor space to consume legal cannabis , I support these locations and those that will be considered in the future. It is close enough to 9 Ave and the main traffic area to be convenient, yet far enough that it won't discourage residents and visitors from enjoying our village. Zero benefit. I own a home in Inglewood. This would make my home potentially attractive to future home buyers. Also close for outings with friends/family who smoke. No benefit to me or the community. Why is the city proposing public consumption sites for pot when you can't drink alcohol in a public space like this? Both should be controlled in the same way. Spaces like this have the potential to become part of the illegal drug trade even though not intended. this area would not benefit me - I would never go there Not at all. Not at all, forget this issue Wouldn't benefit, the opposite would happen, even more street people and druggies hanging around causing mayhem. But Ramsay would keep clean. It would not be a beneficial to me or any of my family or friends It wouldn't in any way I likely wouldn't use it as I own a private home and could smoke there if I desired, however, I support public consumption areas and think this is a fine location for one It's important we take a stand as a community. I cannot say it would be of any great benefit to me as such. No benefit whatsoever. No benefit. Zero benefit, just disadvantage to my family, and my property. I see no benefit in this public consumption area. It wouldn't. It wouldn't. Designated (probably gated or fenced) area would expose consumers and make them look like some social outcasts.
151/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
This entire proposal of converting public green spaces into "Pot Parks" is the dumbest idea I have ever heard. I am not a smoker or Cannabis user nor will I be when legal. But the idea of providing a designated place for people to get high in public is insane. They will become like animals in a Zoo. Not a benefit to me personally or for my business. I would prefer if cannabis were consumed in a closed, private space instead of out in the open in a community where kids and people are walking and biking to and from work/home. Provides a safe place to consume outside of home / away from children or people who do not wish to consume cannabis It would not benefit myself or my family. We are not cannabis users, nor do we intend to use this drug upon its legalization. It is ridiculous to limit legal cannabis in public spaces. If people are not allowed to use it in a rental or condo, how can you expect citizens to travel to one of four parks? You want people driving stoned? Not It would not. It would give me a safe place to go if my condo building decides to ban cannabis usage.
It will not be of any benefit to me It wouldn't. There is no way that pot parks should be allowed. Consumers can do so at home. It would not benefit me in any way. (Also, this question assumes that consumption areas benefit citizens. Pretty big assumption.) It would not benefit me or anyone else. If one is consuming a drug for anything other than medicinal reasons it is not benefiting them. If it is for medicinal reasons they will have their own place to consume it and not pollute the air of the MAJORITY of Calgarians. Not at all. It will not no benefit. Just an opportunity for air pollution. There are no benefits It would not be It would not be an advantage to me at all. Definitely not, not agains legalization of Canabis but feel we do not need public sites in our area. People can consume in their homes just like drinking alcohol Not much of a benefit. I do not smoke or plan to. I would be able to do it at my house. It would not be of benefit to me as a business owner. it would not benefit me It wouldn’t be of any benefit. We have big problems with illegal camps and all kind of similar issues as is and the City has not been very helpful. None what so ever. Not None
152/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
No Benefit to residents & questionable for businesses. How does having a pot park make for a great neighborhood? As pot smoking is a personal choice, why should the City provide a place for residents & tourists alike to smoke pot? Where are the locations for nonsmokers to breathe fresh air? It would not. It wouldn't. I have private property options available to me. It wouldn't. It wouldn't be of benefit to anyone not at all beneficial... I live in Inglewood and have a home in bridgeland and I totally oppose this idea None - hate it!!
2. Are there any issues we should consider with this proposed location?
Such a tiny location. These locations are not desirable, which make it seem like the city is trying to hide the consumption sites. Make it citywide like tobacco There should not be any public sites in the city. What on earth are you thinking? No close enough to my home It seems so close to microbreweries and I worry that people will be consuming alcohol AND cannabis in a small area - that is a combinaiton ripe for terrible decision making. I already am affected by loud foot traffic from microbreweriess Yes. Opening up public consumption in designated public areas is confusing for all. Location is across the street from two breweries, increasing the likelihood of mixed cannabis/alcohol use. Please align with Alberta Health guidance and don't create conditions to promote mixed use. If there are only a handful of consumption sites where one can consume cannabis, you're basically setting up a system where people are forced to drive stoned. Terrible idea. Clearly you're just creating regulations that no one will follow. No Not close to home. Driving under the influence and increased waste Looks rather good actually None that I see There are people with severe allergies to smoke of any kind that will not be able to visit any park where public consumption of cannabis is allowed. Taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for cleanup and stiff fines issued to those that do litter.
153/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
No Not enough food venues nearby Looks great! Yes, why are there no locations in the NW or West??? What about those who want to go to those spaces and not have to breathe in the smoke? It's a little bit out of the way, so people might not know about or use it. None. It's an ideal mix, as the new brewing company is there; intoxicated people with intoxicated people. Children and vulnerable youth would seem out of place in the area, so there's less likelihood of youth drug abuse there. Any of the proposed locations will involve people having to travel there, which also means that people will likely be under the influence when they leave whether it be bus, taxi or driving themselves Proximity to local breweries, increasing public intoxication No The location is separated from other services and public places, making the area a site specifically for consumption and little else. People will travel to this and other designated areas purely to smoke cannabis, encouraging more dangerous consumption. Too close to Drop-in centre. Most people at the drop-in centre are vulnerable and there is no point in facilitating their already troubled lifestyles. Not that I can think of Only one location should be allowed in the community of Inglewood to start with. We ban smoking in public places. Why are we going to allow smoking cannabis in public spaces. This makes no sense. the smell carries so much further. its still too close to businesses You should consider that people will use it everywhere. This level of regulation is a joke. Why build these? Tamper proof ashtrays? Jesus, just let people smoke weed wherever cigarettes are legal and call it a day. Dumb ass bureaucrats. People driving in the area under the influence Too small and not as easily accessible The city should pick somewhere more rural for this kind of gathering. Will children be allowed in this space too? Public intoxication is public intoxication, and should not be allowed anywhere The waste of time and resources to provide a green space for people to smoke cannabis when there are much more pressing matters at hand. holes, we'll have broken bones with all the holes in these green spaces Bright colours, lava lamps
154/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I frequently walk in that area but will cease to once this is a cannabis consumption area. I have allergic asthma so this will be a health issue for me. I don’t live near any of the locations. Am I supposed to drive? Then be forced to stay there for how many hours? This is ridiculous There should be public consumption across the city Cannabis joints or cigarette if you prefer should seen as cigarettes and most adult users prefer already to discretion and mist consider smell when consuming already there will always be offensive people, drunk in public is far worse. ya its a joke Are the stakeholders surreounding this area in agreement? There are bars, restaurants, etc that may WANT it, though I do not agree. no Parking. Proximity to playground. Public consumption should not be allowed. If I can’t get drunk in a park, why should people be allowed to get high? you cant drink in public why is it ok to smoke and get high in public....ridiculous Are sites being looked at where I can take a bottle of wine and drink with friends? smoke or partake on your own residence. - If you own it! You cant drink alcohol on public property, why should cannibus be different No If a person is not legally permitted to consume alcohol in this location, why would or should they be allowed to use Cannabis here??? This is completely irresponsible!!! It's near foot traffic and poses a danger to others. It's also near a place where people consume alcohol. The fact is, like cigarettes, we have to consider second hand smoke. It's a very potent smell that will plague the surrounding areas as well. It's just like the old smoking areas in restaurants, the smoke goes everywhere, not just in the area you tell it. Tones. Nobody should have to smell marijuana. Ban smoking all together. seems like a good place Loss of local business. I know I won’t be visiting this area if there are public consumption areas there. It makes the site unusable to families and those who don't use this drug Plenty also increase chance of under age consumption but forcing people to smoke in an area with out any form of id, If you are going to force it to an area make it like bars to actually control the amount of minors that could access that area.
155/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I would contest the necessity of these sites as a whole. These are a watered-down version of safe consumption sites which are also ill conceived. Please leave consumption sites to peoples private residences. People gathering to party and the smell of canabis should not be a burden to the adjacent residents gateway to hard drug dealing Lighting at park as well as proper disposal facilities. Make it feel safe and give people something to dispose properly so it stays clean. Do not allow Having the train tracks right beside it might be a problem; intoxicated people may stumble onto the tracks, climb the fence, or interrupt train schedules which they otherwise wouldn't if they were sober. The city should not designate public land for this activity SEE ABOVE! NO CONSUMPTION SITES! Let people consume at home only!!!! We don’t have dedicated smoking areas for cigarette smokers why should we for canabis. What’s more open sir smoking in public areas affects those with asthma. I disagree with the city spending my tax dollars on this Yes. Have something on with a NW or SW address. You’re proposing people smoking in a parking lot and not expect people to be driving to and from there and then having high people on the right ads and in the park causing issues where we should be able to relax and enjoy the spaces???? This area has a lot of foot traffic, including families, and is easily accessible from downtown. an open public area like that could draw in a more questionable crowd. Concentrating consumption in one area feels discriminatory. I cannot discretely access my medicine when being forced into a recreational area. I strongly disagree with the proposal to create Cannabis consumption areas. I think the regulation should be the same as for alcohol. Yea not everyone is open about smoking. Only the trending pot smokes will prob use these. No Lighting. Sufficient? How busy is the roadway around the location? Are people safe once they are high? Is there some sort of pedestrian barrier so as to limit the possibility of accidents between cars and people partaking? no its behind businesses.. in a lot that's never been used to any potential and away from children.. also close to trendy eateries etc and you KNOW there needs to he a place in Inglewood to consume Monitoring and enforcement would need to be 24/7 which is not realistic. Otherwise regulations would be useless and a waste of time, effort and dollars. Yes
156/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
No This is a great revitalized business zone - why drive people away with the smell and loiterers? This seems like a really dumb site. Some of the public may avoid these areas because of the concentrated usage of marijuana in this location. There should be no locations are there parks where u can go drink a beer? NO there isn’t stop being idiots it’s a drug crime, noise complaints, littering, fire hazard Why are we designating PARKS for consumption?? It makes no sense. We don't allow consumption of Alcohol in public places, why pot? You're just creating problems. If people want to consume pot, use you're own residence or some sort of a Pot Bar. It’s like opening a beer garden in your backyard I dont want to walk anywhere and smell weed, just like I don't want to see some stumbling drunk guy. I Any and all locations I don’t think the park itself will contain it st all. It’s not legal right now and it’s already being smoked in park, in back and front yards. I can’t stand the smell so what do I do? Consumption of alcohol is not allowed nor should pot Likely to draw in illegal drug activity as well. crowd control, garbage clean-up, noise complaints, liability of people driving impaired after visiting a Calgary facility that isn't supervised yes, make tabacco smokers use only these sites too, i'm offended and piosoned every time the wind blows someones tabacco smoke my way when i breath in, it must stop, plus all the butts on the ground every where, especily harvie passage YOU SHOULD NOT CONSIDER THS OR ANY OTHER LOCATION Yes the public and children use the side walk, park and parking lot. I feel with the legalization of marijuana is fine if keep in the shops as per the Netherlands and not in public places I you can't drink in public parks then you should not be able to smoke either Who will police this. Why do drug users get such special treatment. Alcohol is not allowed in public so neither should drugs. Why do we need them, I can't drink beer in parks. No. What other drugs will be used at this site along with marijuana. Worried people will congregate here and the image of the community will go down. Do you really think people will use these? Toke & go?no shelter
157/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Right to breathe fresh air vs right to "smoke" (consume drugs) - what message are you sending to our impressionable youth? It will not. I think the city needs to decide whether they allow public consumption or not. Doing it like this adds significant ambiguity. If it is to be treated like alcohol, then treat it like alcohol. I can’t have a wine in a park, why weed? Will the public consumption is this site negatively impact the public and residents of Calgary? How will intoxicated persons get safely home from this site? What steps is the city taking to ensure that there will not be an increase in intoxicated driving? Parking. There is already a lack of parking in the commercial areas of Inglewood and this will only serve to make it worse. I don’t think you should consider it. Why should non-consumers of cannabis be forced to avoid this area because public cannabis consumption is endorsed here? You are absolute [offensive language removed] idiots to even remotely think you will confine people to these areas or anywhere for that matter. Weed smoking locations are not for you to dictate you [offensive language removed]!!! 100s of thousands of people will persevere Policing who is legally allowed to consume this drug at even 1 site will be a misappropriation of time for the CPS as well as detract from their mission to "... preserve the quality of life in our community ..." (CPS website) Large collection of stored people in a public space future adjacent development, creating a negative stigma for the Inglewood community; Why are all the locations in Ward 9? I think councillor Gina-Carlo should speak to his constituents before putting forward 100% of the proposed locations. People drive to the site, smoke up then what...drive back to their condo or whatever ? No! My main concerns with any place where people can consume legal weed, they drive to this park where they consume then drive elsewhere. In my opinion this creates safety concerns for everyone. it would be best for them to consume at home. Creating a ghettoized consumption site that no one wants in their neighbourhood. that they aren't being used. people will just do whatever they want .. on the street, while they walk and sadly,in rentals or in their cars. Safety of those not out getting high That night market will never be the same. Why is this located near two microbreweries. This is a terrible location and idea. There is an elementary school down the road, there is he bird sanctuary drawing many Calgarians and tourists nearby, this is a residential community with many children, there is already a problem with homeless camps in this area which is already a problem
158/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 perhaps home owners nearby should be poled to see if they want to be own of only four parks in the city with the increased traffic and stoned drivers. Not really, I just think it should he legal in bars, etc. For years we breath second hand smoke so to me Cannabis consumption should be allowed everywhere its 18+ It’s a [offensive language removed] empty lot. We’re not crackheads. No I don’t think any location is good. What is next green spaces for drinking, other drugs? There will need to be police supervision to keep things under control. Who is paying for that? I think they should smoke in their house. Large groups just cause probl Cannabis consumption should be treated the same as alcohol consumption and not be allowed in any public place. We don’t need public consumption areas. If you want to use, use your own back yard. There is no need to expose your use to others. The location. No consumption on public property. Too close to a brewery. Promotes mixing alcohol and drugs. Very unsafe. Yes, public consumption of cannabis should be allowed. Far away No it looks like a good location Driving to and from. Are you supposed to drive home impaired? Should be able to use freely in public. This is stupid and offensive, do you permit drinking in public places? The smell of pot carries. It bothers me and it gives my wife migraines. With this proposed pot park we won't be able to go to any of the business we patron within a block of this place. You'll be able to smell dope on the patio at gravity, bite and cold g I do not like walking through a cloud of second hand cannabis smoke. I guess I will stop visiting this area of Inglewood. Driving after consumption. Thank goodness I don’t live adjacent to this space. Second had smoke is not something to promote, and not smart to introduce to a developing brain (under 25 years old). You are taking on some serious liability here. Yes, the distance to other residents and sidewalks and even cars. With 2 kids in the car I can see this as a big problem, I cannot cover my kids noses bc we are driving near to this location. Who would want to come here? This is not a nice place to be. NO No bench , no wind cover, nothing to see. WINTER How about a building, that serves coffee too? This location is not acceptable in the winter Yes, too many locations are too far away. How about somehwere in the NW like Bowness?
159/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Given there are 2 breweries within 100 m, and an additional 2 within 300m, isn't this site providing opportunity to mix alcohol and cannabis too easily, with potential health and public safety concerns. No Yes, no one wants a bunch of stoned pot heads hanging around in a concentrated area in our neighborhood. When will you set up alcohol consumption sites ?? This is ridiculous. No Smoking in public around children and those with chronic diseases will negaticely effect the neighbourhood. You can’t drink alcohol outside, why can you get high? Public littering and area becomes attractive to dealers peddling their other drugs and wares. Green areas are for the neighborhood and children are frequently at play in these areas. NO TO ALL Do not allow public use you may have further drug trafficking in this area, kids may consider trying cannabis as they see it walking along the area No Are you adding benches, picnic tables, trees, greenery? Yes - don’t do it! Yes, it is a public park. We do not want Parks to be turned in to pot shops. Take a page from Amsterdam and open "Brown Cafes" where the pot heads can smoke their brains out and not bother other citizens. should not be allowed Keep it far from my neighborhood Increased crime; congregation of people smoking pot is not an image for teens/children to be exposed to. There is a parking lot here which would imply people will drive, park, consume and drive away under the influence posing a danger to anyone on the road. A drug is a drug Cannabis should not be consumed in public areas No This entire idea is ridiculous. No public spaces just like we don’t have public alcohol parks. Misuse of public parks and opposite to what City of Calgary should be working on. Irresponsible decisions by council and poor use of our tax payer dollars. Smell of smoke contradicts legislation of noxious smells. Children and adults exposure to people using cannabis. Smells, garbage.
160/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Why is pot not being treated the same as alcohol, if you can smoke somewhere in public you should be able to drink there too. If you can buy pot in grocerie stores you should be able to buy booze. Nope...other then possible traffic. It’s a public area i think the whole idea of these proposed sites is dumb. People are going to do what they want as I think it will be impossible to enforce these regulations. Let peopke smoke pot the same as cigarettes. That makes the most sense to me. Thank you. Don’t want any public consumption sites. Stupid idea. Issues to address in general: are we treating cannabis like a substance or a tobacco? If substance, then why this approach? I would like a wine park as well. Beside green spaces where family are having pic-nic and all?????...... Those that mean that I will be able to use those area to have a drink? The parking lot adjacent to the park would promote driving after consuming. the effect on the public, smells, behaviours, how/who do we report to when this becomes and issue Canadians are wonderful people but we do love to make things legal and then over- regulate them. Consumption should take place ONLY on the user's private property, not on public property. No public consumption. These ARE NOT cigarettes Is it TOO close to the new breweries? (ie. too many stimulants in a condensed space)? Does Inglewood have the density to support the expense of creating/maintaining this site? Would require driving to site, higher likelihood of impaired driving FROM site? near a brewery, and rail way tracks, dangerous for intoxicated individuals - negative impact to those living right by it and negative impact to business only two blocks up along 9th avenue It is not large enough. Make it the ENTIRE CITY you [offensive language removed]. If consuming an intoxicating substance on public land this should extend to consumption of alcohol in parks as well. I am not a marijuana user but would welcome freer alcohol consumption regulations. Allowing cannabis in public opens this door. no I live nearby, I shop here, I bring my kids here, I ride my bike here. No smoking of any kind in public spaces. It looks like a spot where needle use and pot smoking already occurs. If the green space is not beautified it will not draw a respectful crowd. Unless there is some significant thought to design i feer this project will fail. I like the idea in concept Totally against this. Tax payers money can be spent else where.
161/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Stupid idea. Can't consume alcohol in public places, why would you allow public drug use? Absolutely do not allow this to happen. open areas would promote under the influence driving public cannabis consumption is a terrible idea, we do not allow public alcohol consumption, why would we allow this?? my main concern is that people might drive there, consume and then get back in their car Yes - I honestly believe this is a poorly thought-out idea. It isolates cannabis users, and also forces people to drive high just to get home, since there isn't a location close to their own home to which they have access. No this location is perfect Ya†”-what are tokerd going to do during the 10 mos of winter? What if it’s windy? What if it’s raining ir snowing? Can’t light a bong in a snowstorm! And will they be policed to disallow cigarette smokers? Those are poison. Should perhaps be on a train line so that people don't have to drive here and then drive home high. I don't think it's realistic to expect people to travel quite a distance (or frankly further than a couple of blocks) to smoke pot. The main issue in my opinion is the fact that The City is considering designation locations for consumption of marijuana at all. All this is accomplishing is adding more stigma to a substance that is supposed to be legalised. too close to public areas frequented by children Don’t put it next to a parking lot, dummies. Come on, really? It is a bit isolated, so I would be worried about using this particular space on my own. YES - that these areas are unnecessary in the first place - let people smoke as per provincial rules - namely same as cigarettes. No. No benefit. Just no objection You do not know when people are eating edibles, so why create a law you cannot enforce? Yes. Move locations across the city or have many locations. For people who transit and live in nw or sw are not going to travel that far in -40 weather just to take they’re medication. I can tell you personally I will be smoking in public areas. The city is not under any obligation to accommodate pot users who are unable to find a legal place. Calgary has a safe drug use site set up. Cannabis users should be allowed to use cannabis there. Not in my opinion None that I can think of. Over-crowdedness
162/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 it wouldn't. I need a consumption point but all of the proposed are too far. Am I expected to drive to and from intoxicated? because I highly disagree with driving under the influence None. As of right now it's just a boring empty space not being used. Nope The entire idea of pot parks is just plain stupid less residential areas should be considered. It seems very close to homes and I'm sure non cannabis users do not want to smell the smoke that could come from the site on windy days. Many outdoor events are held in this areaduring the spring, summer and fall held for the general public. It would be deterant for me to attend events here. Also consider the residents that would back onto this greenspace. Property value would decrease. Yes, gangs will control these sites. More illegal drugs can be exchanged. More cost to taxpayers with police control or health issues. People who are low income earners to begin with but have money to waste on drugs, give your head a shake. No, there are no houses adjacent. there's a bar across the street. seems perfect. None Only occasionally, but this may be unwelcome during the Inglewood Night Market or similar events, due to the pungent smell of marijuana. None that I can see Inglewood and Bridgeland will be perfect for the Drop-In Center and other homeless shelter people to go to. Pot parks in Inglewood will be detrimental to our image as a revitalized family community. It will decrease enrollments in Colonel Walker and Ramsay Schools, Inglewood daycares, Before/Afterschools are all close to these areas, & decrease retail traffic. Looks fine. There aren’t enough trees to provide satisfactory ambience to the area. 2 issues: 1) With all the ads for not mixing alcohol/weed, this location is next to 2 breweries and many restaurants/bars. 2. Historically inglewood worked hard to eliminate Drugs/alcohol/hookers from the area, a cannabis park puts that back at risk. Potential for it to become a breeding ground for illegal activities, such as other drug use and dealing. Cannabis smoking should not be limited to a specific park - it may make people feel outed. As outlined above + too close to community Cannabis consumption should not be in "designated" public spaces but be treated like cigarette smoking. No location is acceptable. If alcohol is not allowed in these areas, neither should cannibas. It is an unreasonable argument that specific areas such as those proposed should be set aside for cannibas when alcohol is not allowed
163/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
This is far too close to residences. The area is already congested. Parking is an issue. Bylaw has been called numerous times. There is already garbage left behind in this area from people passingly by. This isn’t not a preferred location. Parks are for recreational purposes, not for alcohol, canabbis, etc. Our kids and teens are there to enjoy the outdoors not to watch people getting high or intoxicated. It's a ~100m^2 area where 1/4 of the quarter of a million people are expected to smoke. How do you guys possibly plan on enforcing these restrictions Its essentially impossible for you to enforce the current tobacco restrictions near doors outside of 7th? It’s full of gophers and gopher holes! It’ll be cold Are people expected to drive from all over the city to visit these spaces? There is a residential area to the east directly across the street. There is a playground a block club and a half directly to the east of the site. There is also a playground in Ramsey across the rail tracks that overlooks this area. There is a playground up on the hill just on the other side of the train tracks in Ramsay. I regularly walk past this site with my children. There is no sidewalk on the other side of the street so we will be forced to walk past he site. Make sure snack places close by ;) I am against Pot Parks. Addicts This is completely unreasonable and frankly laughable to expect every cannabis user in a city like calgary to congregate in only THREE areas. i am willing to bet you be unable to enforce this whatsoever. Many breweries behind - who will monitor public intoxication? Who will keep this area safe and clean? How will children be kept from buying marijuana? We don't allow alcohol or smoking cigarettes consumption parks. So why allow cannabis. Major liability issues as how does one get back home. Please have common sense and allow nothing. Keep a park a park for everyone to enjoy. It is a blind corner and has a lot of afternoon traffic. People walking across the road could potentially get run over due to additional traffic in the area. Yes of course!!!!!! Not enough characters to post my reasons. there should not be any consumption locations We are concerned with the number of people that a small scale pilot will bring to the area being the closest site to the downtown & with 2 breweries there. Parking and noise will impact the neighbourhood. Concern about having people there at all hours. Perhaps a time of day limitation to prevent exposure to children coming and going to school (so like: no doping between 8-9 and 12-1, and 3-4)?
164/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
The area is open, visible and in close proximity to well used public walkways and roads. The city is not allowing cannabis to be used in parks, public spaces. How is this different. People smoking pot which smells This is tucked away in the middle of a commercial belt. for users to feel safe lighting and viability should be a consideration. Concerned about safety of users Consider adding lots of benches, and extending the bike lane further south along 12th Street to facilitate non-driving access. Right next to 2 breweries and a bar. What could possibly go wrong? Do not agree with legalizing pot Don't agree with legalizing pot There are schools and parks close by. I have worked at the school close by and go on walks through the community and this is no t something we want to walk by. No crack heads allowed No encouraging drug use in public spaces, and open air is a concern. Absolutely. The petty crime will go up and business will suffer. It is small and far from home. Why do we need to offer up green space in the first place? Drinking is legal but we need to either drink in a licensed establishment or in our own home. Why should pot be any different. By putting it next to a parking lot you are encouraging people to drive there. Then they will get back into their cars impared. The idea of setting out these areas specifically for this use is more pandering to a specific special interest group is ridiculous. These are neighborhoods with families. The rationalizations used for this proposal do not make sense. Yes, people are going to use cannabis where ever they want to and not in a designated area. Vaping should be legal anywhere you can smoke cigarettes, Vaping does not smell and is discreet. How are these sites going to be monitored? How will drug use be restricted to only cannabis? I can see these sites being used by heavier drug users and criminals. This is a huge issue. Not, very many apartment dwellers or hotels around. How are people going to get there. Too many. Dumb idea. Across from a church Please see comments below. The skunk smell makes us sick! Just went down tgere to shop and eat eith my kids! Empty stores. Homeless guys hanging out! Walk around! A senior at seniors center smoking a joint (one) sitting out on porch. We could smell it for three blocks! Wont go back
165/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I don't believe the City of Calgary should provide ANY park for cannabis consumption! We do not need pot smoking hang outs in any Community. I do not understand why our city council feels that pot parks are necessary and it appears to me that city council has decided to promote cannabis use in this proposal for pot parks. Seems really out of the way. I would assume people will want to consume canabis outside of drinking establishements. This is in the middle of no where. Spot will encourage loitering. We don't allow for the public consumption of alcohol, why is it ok to consume cannabis in public. People can purchase oils instead of joints/dried product and are able to use oils in their private home regardless of landloard rules. Yes. As a tax payer of two properties in Inglewood and as a parent of a 14 year old I have no interest in making Inglewood the pot moking capital of Calgary nor aving my daughter exposed to pot smokers or the smoke from pot.
This is an unattractive space, will you make it more like a park setting? Is this what we should be spending taxpayer money on? Doubt it! If you don't let people drink or smoke in public, then why would you let people smoke pot in public. Cannabis should be consumed in private areas only. No need to promote something not healthy for the lungs to younger generations. Many issues, consisting of: lack of parking, all ready issues with over conjestion and people parking where the should not(bylaw problems) . Residents with children directly behind the area. A ongoing problem with garbage in the field, that will only get worse with more impaired people using it. Ext
It's across the street from two very popular new breweries. Could get pretty rowdy with people also smoking up there. No I will avoid going to Inglewood if there is a public consumption site. There will be no regulation in preventing people from wandering away from the space and we will all be forced to breathe in their second hand noxious smoke. A disgrace. My two cents. Why would we go to this extreme to put cannabis smoking areas around the city? Why are we treating this differently than alcohol ? I would like parks to sit and drink in so why not extend that? The reasoning for this is ludicrous in I don't live anywhere near any of the proposed pot smoking parks, thank God! This is not a good idea at all, we don't need these spaces. People who smoke it already have places to do it discreetly so it doesn't bother others. Why are we jumping in to try and solve a problem that just doesn't exist?
166/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Yes! The nearby day homes for kids and ICDC Daycare. How will pot smokers get to this park in the fall, winter, and spring when it is too cold to walk. Spending our tax dollars on and giving up green space for a park only a small percentage of people will use for 3 months of the year is dumb.
Forcing a PUBLIC space to be designated preferentially for certain citizens who decide to engage in smoking marijuana. I see this as similar to having certain parks designated for heterosexuals †œallowed― in certain areas. Let's walk through this. I decide I need an evening joint. I get in my car, drive 15 kms or so to Inglewood, pay for parking, smoke my joint and then drive home. Not sure that works for anybody. Anyone who chooses to not consume canabis will not want to go anywhere near theses parks. What other drug use will it attract and how will rules be enforced. How will people get to these parks? If people drive will they also drive home impaired? How will this ultimately tax our police force?
Will there be indoor locations In every neighborhood as well? People will not go outside and walk any distance in the winter to smoke anything... There are issues with all proposed locations..They makes absolutely no sense,, You want people to go to some random spot outside and stand there with a bunch of strangers and smoke.. I'm not looking for people to communicate with thanks.. I should be able to use a legal substance anywhere in Calgary
We don't allow alcohol to be used outdoors all over. cannabis should be treated like alcohol. Used in designated indoor establishments & your own home. As per my next comment: it's a bit barren. To avoid the area turning skuzzy with the change in designation you might want to spruce it up and make the space attractive to responsible users. Issues I'm concerned about is the behavior of people being ALLOWED to openly use drugs in any City Park in my home town of Calgary, Alberta. You are inviting crime to increase in these areas, inviting public intoxication, inviting public use of other drugs in these parks. Seriously -are you nuts?
Proximity to 9th Ave and the local breweries would mean that this site would get used and possibly appreciated. It strikes me that this site would not be an imposition on the community. I think. Local pubs and breweries across the road from it might encourage increased combination of alcohol and cannabis consumption. Why did we vote this bunch of council idiots
167/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Having to keep away from Churches , schools, other stores, other businesses, grave yards WHAT?? Gees when will the BS end. I am totally amazed at your stupidity in all of this. Its a wonder you guys can even function on a daily basis
Impaired driving. It is next to two breweries. The mix of beer and cannabis may produce an area of inebriation that would spill into adjacent areas of the community.
There is not enough space on this form to describe my comments.
It's near downtown, closer to everyone. It’s an unattractive dirt lot that has no benefits or appeal to smoke at. Yes, due to a terrible car accident, I live in Alice Bissett Place at 2990-17St. SE. I am very concerned about opening a park here for people to smoke pot. A lot of the people in this complex suffer from mental illness and take meds and I know having parks like that will be a bad for neighborhood
Yeah how are we supposed to get there and what are we supposed to do there? My concern is that there are not enough proposed spaces. I find it ridiculous to designate only 3 communities in a city of 1.4 million citizens for a product that will be legal in October. It's like telling people they can only have 6 liquor stores in the entire city. Please see comments below- I do not want this project anywhere in our community that we care about and where we raise families. There is no acceptable location for public consumption Yes, there are issues around the smell for businesses and people nearby. Bad location and not great for those trying to entice people to come to Inglewood to enjoy our shops. This is a growing community but the majority of the residents are (like myself) seniors. I am morally opposed to any site and especially don't think Inglewood should be burdened with two locations. I am actually an educator and generally open minded but this bothers me. See above How would the area be policed for vagrancy and potential cases of exposure in cold weather? Smoking cannabis should be treated the same as smoking tobacco. There should be no different rules for those users as far as where they can smoke in public spaces. Attempting to concentrate cannabis smokers in certain locations is ill advised as most people will not follow that bylaw.
Why Inglewood? We have enough going on here. It's time the other communities step up!! People are not allowed to drink in a public space, why would we allow the use of cannabis?
168/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Cannabis is an intoxicant. the Wildlands Parking lot is exactly that- a parking lot, used for cars. Driving cars under the influence of an intoxicant is dangerous, and illegal- and this by CWS and the Piitoyais school. Have the CPS weighed in? Strong scent of weed, large group of people, people driving to or from the location while under the influence No , I feel we need many more in other communities such as Kensington where I live I support this location. This location is right along the corridor for all Ramsey residents walking into Inglewood. My street is full of young families. I don’t want to walk my kids through a cloud of weed. People choose to live in Ramsey for the walkability - this location is far too centralized. Smoke from the intended activities could easily be blown over to the nearby houses in Ramsay (there is also a playground quite nearby). As well being located so close to a future green line station could make this a very high traffic site with issues of garbage, vandalism, and possibly crime.
Designating a specific location to smoke cannabis is a weird idea. I would not want to live close to it. If people actually go there, it could turn into a party place, with drinking, drug exchange & experimentation. Noise levels, groups loitering, littering, people driving DUI. Ugh! I have an issue with any location. We regulate alcohol consumption by having it consumed in safe and regulated space with no minors present. Why are you even considering allowing pot to be consumed in public spaces? If you allow pot, drinking at these locations will follow. Please reconsider.
People don't want it, too close to public places and completely un-necessary. Like alcohol why not have a venue like a bar. Our city hall is rushing this through just like our Prime Minister has without taking a breath and thoroughly thinking of the consequences. Leave the parks the way they are...For everyone not just cannabis users or for that matter not for alcohol consumption. This location makes sense, can be monitored, accessible, parking is an issue in the popular area but have no issue with the location, keep it clean, green, and appealing. Cannabis consumption is complex and a significant change to the social landscape of Canada. Individual choice is reflected in the public health approach as it should be. However, until more is understood, supporting public spaces for consumption should not be on the table at this time. no This proposed location would seem to be far enough away from Inglewood residents that it should not be a disturbance to the people living close by.
169/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Yes regulation- its an intoxicant, like alcohol; users must be over 18, who regulates? who provides maintenance of site- daily clean up? how do a bunch of stoned people gathered on a few benches contribute to the community? If weed can be smoked in public places, so must alcohol be allowed
Inglewood has made wonderful strides to become a diverse energetic community. Having a consumption site goes against everything they are trying to accomplish. After the horrid condo fire there that was started by butts - that displaced hundreds of citizens - this makes no sense and nothing good.
Cannabis consumption should not take place outside of private homes. Yes- escalation into ingesting other drugs than cannabis. There is no way that the City, or the Police, have the manpower to manage this situation, and residential is literally just across the street. The possibility of this situation getting crazy, and spilling into adjacent residential, is real.
Pedestrians will be affected by the smell. They will inhale unwanted cannabis smoke. The parking situation in this area is already a nightmare. Yes, it is obvious discrimination and shaming of consumers. Those who live in apartments and are cannabis users had no problem in consuming it out of public view when illegal and will not be prone to gather in an open park among strangers to toke up. These places will just become a magnet for those over 19 to sell pot to those under the legal age.
I don't agree with people being under the influence of any drug (or alcohol) in the open where the community is conducting legitimate business or living. There isn't a way to protect passersby or non-users from the odours and it normalizes drug consumption. Make attractive to people - benches, seating areas, tables to play board games or read a book, shelter from rain and sun, trees. Currently, the area is not particularly attractive. Issue 1: Site access - Will all users use public transport and/or walk to the site. If not, will people accessing the site be driving motorized vehicles or bicycles to and from? Issue 2: Proximity to Breweries will encourage combining drinking and smoking. Will patrons drive to access the sites?
Yes - it should be open and legal everywhere, or just like smoking. Otherwise make it like alcohol, and make it available in bars. Spend some time on more public needs than this !! Too close to existing breweries. Consumption of alcohol and cannabis are different activities and should have different destination areas to enjoy both respectively. None, very suitable place and likely already being used for cannabis usage.
170/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 while I applaud our being proactive, I have concerns & no solution. Safety- If I am using the site to consume, aren't I a target for others looking to borrow, buy or take my stash? If I'm looking to score, isn't that the first place to try for the same reasons. Public consumption not a good idea.
This area has lots of families with the neighborhood school sometimes using this area for their programs. I’m also concerned about the kind of people this site might attract and loitering in the area. Yes. Has the [removed] considered that he is driving down property values of HIS OWN CONSTITUENTS???? Of the two proposed sites, this is the least bad. As a destination site for Calgarians, and with two breweries adjacent to the site, how will police ensure that individuals don't drive. Will there be a dedicated police presence? The air quality for all citizens of Calgary, the spectacle and normalization of it for our young people and youth whose brains, up to even age 30, can be dramatically modified and cannot be unmodified (read the medical research). Yes, too close to residential areas where there are children and families. Any location that can be used as a play area, recreational area and especially has minors present should not be considered. I oppose any location as it becomes a gathering point and encourages traffic and parking issues to the neighbourhood. AHS is opposed for good reason. Degradation of standard
Why would anyone have to be subjected to this pollution? How will this area be used during the frequent family friendly events that happen on this street such as the night markets and music festivals. This is a silly idea Drinking alcohol and smoking pot should be confined as drinking alcohol is now. The site at the end of 9th ave and 22 nd Street is a poor choice. Too much †œwild lands―and remote places for things to escalate to injection sites etc. Too dark and secluded. I am not sure why we need sites, just use canabis in your home or yard if you feel the need to be out doors. How it could negatively impact the businesses in the area. The associated smell. The gathering of people off the main corridor. There is always a fire risk of having a smoking site in a park. It’s right across from 2 breweries so people will be going between them consuming both substances. I would do such a thing myself. I think garbage could be an issue. how will this be monitored and could bring other drug use - residential homes will be affected See above
171/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It is totally inappropriate to have ANY public designated consumption areas. We finally cleaned up Inglewood! Leave it. This space is already unpleasant for walks because of drunk people from the breweries and now you propose adding stoned people? Not to mention the illogic of proposing people from all over the city come to Inglewood to get stoned and then, what, drive home? None Proximity to brewery†”intoxicated driving/riding 1. Lack of communication re approval of the idea of pot parks and selection of sites 2. Health air pollution & 2nd hand smoke affecting humans & wildlife 3. Safety 4. Cost how much to build and maintain 5. Parking & Traffic 6 .Liability 7. Loss of valued green space 8. Selection of sites Concentrating users in a locations that isn't a place people would otherwise go to recreate or shop seems like it's inviting trouble. This location isn't a place people spend time. Why are we intentionally concentrating users into one area (a not well traveled area at that) Parks, especially inner-city ones, are often used by families and seniors as a way to get outdoors when living in multi-family/condo environments - how does this proposal support a healthy safe environment for them? No Do we really want people driving to designated pot smoking areas, smoking up, then driving home? Dumb idea! There is no reason the city of Calgary should get involved in allowing people to consume pot in any outdoor space... period Do do it!!! GCC has approved stores then smoking areas encouraging too much high risk activity in the community encouraging intoxicated individuals to drive or roam the streets.
3. Do you have any other questions or comments regarding the proposed location?
By effectively hiding this location far away from the main throughfare of 9th Avenue SW and nestling it near the railroad tracks, the city continues to reinforce the stigma surrounding cannabis use.
There should be lots of places to sit ( picnic tables etc.). It should be bigger
172/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
No public consumption sites please. Not everybody agrees with legalization, but it is and people can chose to do it privately. We should not facilitate areas where others will be impacted and potential additional complications are created. nope add more areas skyview panorama cornerstone Why are so few green spaces earmarked for this? I think that it unduly favours the microbrewery/hipster crowd. Was this location [personal information removed] idea? Yes. At this time I'm not supportive of opening up public consumption in designated areas as it is confusing. I would encourage The City to wait until edibles are approved and then revisit this.
This would be a great spot Only making four spots is one of the most unintelligent things I ever heard.
Does this plan consider any increased waster disposal in the area for butts or roaches?
Given its orientation between The Nash, the brewery and the Festival Hall, it looks like a pretty good location I think that the proposed consumption site is a great use of this space.
Wondering if it will be used in a remote location. If it is well used what type of activity (legal or illegal) will appear here? Snack and water sales?
Yes, this seems like an oversight, Yes, why are there no locations in the NW or West???
I think cannabis rules should follow the liquor rules. Are people allowed open liquor there? Too bad if they are not allowed to smoke "at home" - that is not up to us to alleviate. Maybe they should move if it means that much to them.
Right now it is a very plain space - I hope that this designation will involve funds to upgrade the green space into a nice park with benches/tables/seating, and possibly some public art.
More designated consumption areas should be like this: in an open, easily observed space. Marijuana consumption shouldn't be pushed off to the side, or moved to a location to make it seem unethical. It should be normalized for adult smokers and patients.
173/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Concerned for public safety, the behaviour of people using these places, who's going to monitor them Why propose consumption sites and not something more like a bar? Will alcohol be allowed at the consumption sites?\(the argum
The separation of cannabis sites will encourage reckless consumption and continue to promote negative public opinion of cannabis. This is especially dangerous for medicinal cannabis users, whose social standing will only depreciate despite their need.
Billions of $'s are being spent to upgrade East Village and Inglewood. Public areas in these neighbourhoods are being used by families, many with young children. What an example to set them with pot smokers hanging out!!! I think it's a great idea! Don't do it. We don't need to provide green spaces for smoking for ANY time of smoking. very short sighted I understand that inglewood is a developing area for the city. However, the reckless decision will affect many residents life, especially kids. We have no choice but to move.
Why is cannibis consumption in public being considered. Is it possible for alcohol consumption to also be considered at these locations?
The idea of a place you can smoke pot in the open when there are not the same types of areas for alcohol, makes no sense. Public intoxication is illegal and should include those that are impaired by pot
These spaces can be utilized much more effectively for far better causes. This entire notion of providing green spaces for cannabis users is an embarrassment. why so far? When was this decision made? This is such a ridiculous proposal I question if this is serious? A safe, non harmful, and proven beneficial substance that should never have been criminalized. But regulating it harsher than alcohol, which has zero benefits and plenty of risks. Absolutely ludicrous There should be public consumption across the city
174/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
When are we going to stop the negative PROPAGANDA around this beneficial plant? Anyone who educates themselves knows this aas never scheduled correctly or even properly discussed before being added to Schedule 1. The days of lies about cannabis are at end cannabis is safer than sugar I am against public consumption sites anywhere in calgary It looks like rich neighbourhoods are always exempted on this. I’m sure that there are areas located in rich neighborhoods that also meet all the criteria. The city needs to release all the other areas that they have considered for this.
Why would the majority of Calgary tax payer want to pay the bill for upkeeping and removal of waste at these disignated spots. Maybe the city could put a payment toll booth at these 4 areas and charge $ 100 for each entry to cover their use of site.
So, someone could be ticket or arrested for consuming alcohol in this "park" but the City of Calgary wants to make it ok to use Cannabis? this makes no sense whatsoever! If the city MUST have designated areas I ask that they be enclosed. There are already people who are smoking on a sidewalk and it is unwelcoming for those walking by.
There should be absolutely no public areas to get high. Don't do it. no I thought that cannabis was supposed to follow the same rules as liquor consumption. Since when are people allowed to drink in public parks?
I am apposed to any public consumption of cannabis. As a non smoker I should be able to navigate to city without concern of the second hand smoke. Keep the rules in line with alcohol. Unlike alcohol consumption, smoke is not something that stays in a particular place. How can you designate any public space and not adversely affect non drug users
Smoking is not allowed in public so why should cannabis be permitted? also opens the area to illegal drug trade as it will be a hot spot of drug users, so unless you plan of increasing police force (wasting more money) to patrol these areas 24/7 you literally created an area for kids to go get high and buy more hardcoredrug
I would add that I hope no tax dollars are spent on this.
175/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
What about the winter? People gathering to party and the smell of canabis should not be a burden to the adjacent residents i dont wanrt my tax dollars speant on supporting a vice juJus like alcohol, let the cannibus retailers provide "designated consumptiom areas" What public transit is available nearby and is it safe to get to from this location.
Yes. If you live in s non smoking building it’s your choice. It isn’t my choice to be affected if any open sir smoking. Why isn’t there an NW or SW location? Why public smoking locations in our community in the first place?? And why 3 proposed sites??all I see going into our community are low income housing, breweries, cannabis stores, and now propsoded public smoking sites which invite problems to our communi
I would expect there to be alot more litter. I would hope the city would address that as anyone could pick up the roaches, or wildlife could injest
It's not necessary to provide public consumption places! The issues with creating these areas are similar to those for designated alchohol consumption areas. Cannabis should be controlled in the same manner as alcohol - in public areas only when there is a license issued to a responsible party.
Yea needs to be pubs where people can sit down watch a game and smoke with friends.
Who is going to pay for these setups? I will not be using so why should I have to pay for this? I think this legislation of cannibis is going to be a big mistake
Are the buildings around the area business? Warehouses? Residences? Noise issues in the surrounding area? The City should not be providing consumption sites. Our tax dollars should be spent on more in-need people and social problems like low-cost housing. Get your heads out of the cannabis haze.
No Why are there two locations in Inglewood, yet non in almost every area in the city? These public consumption areas do not serve 99% of Calgarians.
Please don't make this area one of the sites. We frequently go there for music, food, stores, and do not want the smell. We would be likely to go elsewhere.
176/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I feel the same about all of the proposed sites. I believe marijuana should be able to be consumed the same as cigarettes. Also, how practical will it be to enforce the smoking of marijuana outside of designated areas..
There should be no designated areas except in your own home what the hell is wrong with you If you're going to have public consumption sites for weed, you have to include alcohol. Impaired is impaired, and why should one get preference over the other?
No. I don't agree in general with any pot parks. Pot should be treated the same way as alcohol , it should not be consumed in public
All of the locations, I find it ridiculous. If its legalized then it should be consumed in your home or like the Netherlands and control it to cafes. If you want to take part you go into the cafe just like you do with booze and pubs.
Is there going to be beer parks too then? The community itself in all three areas will suffer greatly. There will be people there all day and night except for winter. The will not be able to not smell it. Think you should find another solution. I see a disaster ready to happen.
No, if I pass this park I may lose my job, it's happened beforehand, we at pcl have strict rules and with good reason This is the worse idea. I can't see a single benefit but lots of problems. Will the City be sued when someone over consumes at an unsupervised City facility and then drives impaired? one is a block from my house and i like it, i'll get a sence of which of my nieghbours are cool and liberal thinkers THIS IS IRRESPONSIBLE. THE AWFUL SMELL OF SMOKED MARIJUANA WILL NOT BE CONTAINED IN A PARK AND WILL DRIFT TO ALL AREAS AROUND. YOU HAVE NO CONTROL ON WIND DO YOU?
No need for Pot Parks Yes keep them in selling establishments as per selling alcohol Why do drug users have more rights than non-drug users? Why do we need a public space for druggies to get stoned?? How will this designated area be supervised or site enforced? People will move around
177/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I thought tiny houses in the Bird Sanctuary was the looniest thing you had proposed yet - but this wins all! So much for a family-friendly city when recreational areas are being converted into recreational drug use hangouts - shame on you, [personal information removed]! How can you possibly justify these sites to your children?
Why are there two locations in Inglewood? If this isn’t a negative effecting pilot, why don’t we see one of the pilot areas moved to one of the more affluent neighbourhoods like Mount Royal, Credceny Heights, Or West Hillhurst?
We should not have this as a public consumption site. It has the potential to increase crime. I don’t see why we need designated public spaces for cannabis. I thought that cannabis consumption rules and designated areas had to mirror alcohol consumption rules and designated areas. Since public consumption of alcohol is not permitted in parks why is cannabis being permitted? What does the CPS say about these proposed sites? Have they even been consulted (since this decision will impact them)? Smoking cannabis should be restricted to home use. No smoking or drinking in our parks, why would anyone think cannabis should get special privileges. People can use oil instead of smoking.
Inglewood does not need a single public cannabis use site that would attract users from across the city and elsewhere, never mind two locations
I am against piloting 4 locations in one ward. If this is going to happen responsibly, it needs to be spread amongst the wards (inner city and suburbs).
Silly!!! Designated pot spots! Why is there only locations in ward 9? I think allowing people to consume these products in a public space, makes it seem safe. Like cigarettes, they will affect the health and wellness of others exposed to this. I think we should not go ahead with this park.
Agree the issue needs to be addressed, but this is not the answer.
I don't oppose this suggestion and would hope for it to work .. I think, the one next to the breweries might work. Locations should not be provided as you can't drink in public so why is it ok to smoke pot.
178/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It's like a dirty grassy parking lot with trees in it. Very seedy / greasy. It's perfect!
How did you choose this location? Why do you think this is a good idea? If people can smoke weed in parks, why not drink beer? Absolutely terrible rationale on this!
This is no way should go ahead. 4 sites in one riding is in itself ridiculous and speaks to the councilor putting these sites forth. As a family doctor I am disgusted by the proliferation of Public consumption of marijuana where my children can be affecte do it! ...and more of them There ahould be more than one location. There should be al least 1 per ccity quadrant and a few surrounding downtown LET IT GO. you clowns just don’t understand. You’re like a bunch of grade 5 children trying to regulate this. I do not want to see cannabis consumption in any public space. No really, just think it’s ridiculous that we are considering public consumption areas.
This is insulting either that or a [offensive language removed] joke. No consumption on public property. Would this be enclosed? why only 3 communities Looks good Don't need public spaces. Keep it in private residences. Who is making these decisions. If weed is a medicine it should be freely used. Do you guys want a park for prescribed drugs. Come on let's use our brains. Edmonton seems to know what they are doing
This is stupid and offensive, do you permit drinking in public places?
DO NOT GO FORWARD WITH THIS PILOT. This will negatively effect our community. This "pilot" is proposed in 4 locations it will create a concentration of users. People will travel into our area to do drugs. Note there are no parks where alcohol is permited
I realize where to smoke is a problem - however, I am uncomfortable with the legalization of pot in general. Is the councillor high for suggesting this idea?
179/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
These will attract occasional smokers but also people that cannot afford it, I see these places as becoming sleep location for some of addicts. Has the city look into how these sites will be regulated/policed? I am against smoking sites within residential you should make social clubs a reality and not force people into wasted piece of decrypt land. I'm not smoking a joint in a vacant lot, coffeeshops need to be built or i will blow smoke on every kid i see Where are the NW locations? While I am in favour of a consumption zone within Inglewood, I do not believe the proposed site is appropriate. An alternative site could be off the pathway off New Street, in the green space beside the parking lot for Rouge.
We need more spaces for public consumption Yes. So can I drink here as well in public because I don’t have somewhere to drink in public? Can I smoke cigars here? Can I have public sex here (sex is legal)? Can I masturbate here? That’s legal.
How do other jurisdictions with legalized Cannabis handle this? Colorado, Washington states? No Please don’t allow marijuana smoking outside in public spaces. Leave it inside in marijuana [bad data transfer] similar to alcohol Smoking cigarettes or cannabis is detrimental to the health of the user & makes breathing problems worse for others in proximity of the smoke. Cannabis use should be limited to oils & edibles, There is no need to provide public sites.
NO NO NO . What about the rest of the City....WHY .....are you doing this? This is causing so much controversy. YOU HAVE NOT DONE ENOUGH RESEARCH. if you are going to allow consumption of cannabis in this area will you consider allowing drinking as well then? I would hate to see people getting intoxicated in an open area as there would be no control as there is in a bar were people drink.
4 places to smoke. Stupid. Need more free range Will you have any designated ares a more in the downtown area, perhaps the bow river?
What about second hand smoke?! We don’t know for sure if there is or is not an impact. Why are my rights ignored?
180/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
We do not need public areas used for smoking, are there parks where you can drink alcohol? These public areas should not be used for this purpose why do we have to give them a place to get high When will silly hall have the first Toke Party sponsored by my tax dollars
I totally disagree with any green space fir consumption. There are no green spaces for alchol so why pot. Why is a 'Public Consumption' Site needed? Is there Public Consumption sites to consume Alcohol? No alcohol is consumed in paid establishment, not tax payer funded properties.
Can I drink a beer with my joint? Cannabis should not be consumed in public areas This entire idea is ridiculous. No public spaces just like we don’t have public alcohol parks.
Anyone who approves this should be equally prepared to approve use of "responsible" alcohol consumption in parks. Will the site be monitored in any way? All public ares should be off limits for pot consumption i think the whole idea of these proposed sites is dumb. People are going to do what they want as I think it will be impossible to enforce these regulations. Let peopke smoke pot the same as cigarettes. That makes the most sense to me. Thank you.
Don’t want to see any locations. You have Absolutely zero considerations for Medical Canabis Smokers. I have to go to some park to take my meds, wait in this area for 4 hours to drive again? These †œDesignated Canabis Smoking Dog Park― areas are complete waste of time and money.
At what cost? Can't never be done on the cheap side. terrible idea Have pity on the poor bylaw officers and police -- not to mention green space users -- and make it the same as smoking, except when it comes to driving of course..
Making cannabis consumption legal is a very bad idea to start with.
181/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I can’t believe this is even being considered. You can’t consume alcohol in public places so why is cannabis being treated differently? It’s the same thing. This idea is unacceptable.
No public consumption. Why are most of the locations in the core/east-side? What is the anticipated usage that would impact cost-benefit/tax-dollars needed (ie. parks generally have multiple uses throughout the year, but these proposals appear to have a single-use).
Public space should not be used to smoke or drink poor choice! All of city council should quit. The caveman attitude you cunts have about cannabis is embarrassing. This is a helpful plant. Go fix the roads.
This is a skewed survey questionnaire. Council is not listening to the majority of voters who didn't want legalization and who don't want public consumption. The smell of marijuana has a much wider area of impact than alcohol or cigarettes.
Cannibus use is a private indoor activity that shouldn't affect others especially kids.
I dont know the design details, I hope that there are more attractive and convenient locations sellected Totally against this. Tax payers money can be spend else where. Having a beer does not have any immediate affect on others in the immediate vicinity. Smoking of any material does negatively affect those around the smoker. Have smoking clubs like the cigar smoking clubs. should be treated the same as alcohol in public areas public cannabis consumption is a terrible idea, we do not allow public alcohol consumption, why would we allow this?? Tobacco smoke is far more harmful than cannabis smoke - this is a known fact. I see people smoking everywhere on the city streets and in the parks - why can't cannabis be treated as tobacco is? Why do we insist on stigmatizing usage and corralling users?
I agree this is a great location
182/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
[personal information removed]. I ran Calgary’s 1st 7-day-a-wk, 18+, cannabis-positive space, [personal information removed]. We were open for an entire year in 2016. In between 2 high schools, we had no minor sneak in. We had absolutely no cannabis sales; BYOBud. City, CPS: NP
We do not need public consumption sites at all! Where are the public consumption sites for alcohol? It doesn't make sense. Consumption sites need to be away from public space, not part of it. This is not cigarettes, it's a controlled substance.
Given that marijuana smoke is far less toxic than cigarette smoke, why are there not proposed benches for public consumption of cigarettes as well? It does not make sense to have people drive in to these locations to consume marijuana and then drive home.
bad idea .....very bad idea Perhaps extend it to the entire neighbourhood and then people would respect it.
It is good to have access to public transit Why are you disregarding the provincial legislation and attempting to corral users in public? It's a clumsy proposition at best.
No No problem given that I live across town. I can imagine the properties that back onto that location wouldn't be overly enthused
Dum idea by a typical top-down administration. With a population of q.wy million do you really think 3 designated places are going to be enough.? Especially having them all in the same neighbourhood. I’m sorry but this is a poorly constructed law.
Having a designated site at events is fine. similar to beer gardens
When will other areas/neighbourhoods get designated areas? None. Is only cannabis to be used? it wouldn't. I need a consumption point but all of the proposed are too far. Am I expected to drive to and from intoxicated? because I highly disagree with driving under the influence
183/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I strongly disagree with any consumption sites. Further, consumption on private property should be subject to smoke and odour being contained on that property.
I think it's a good location since there is lots of breweries near by.
Everyone should treat pot smoking as we always have in private period
How about beside the cross roads market close to the Ramsay Police station so it can be monitored more easily. Have a feeling this could invite more issues if not closely monitored, not opposed just needs to be in the right places. No residential places.
I have educated myself on this subject matter through, online articles, news, interviews etc. I am convenced that it is not a positive benefit to the residence in this area or general public. Safe injection sites are ridiculous that are prompting drug use and now pot smoking sites proposed. Money would be better spent on getting people off drugs instead of promoting drug use. No wonder this PM of Canada has a nickname of Trudope.
Will there be seating? If drinking in public is illegal why should people be allowed to smoke marijuana in public?!
We need more sites. none Any shelter from the elements? There won't be many takers on it. How about pot bars in better areas of town. Hillhurst or the west side of town.
It would be a terrible set back for the revitalization of Inglewood and it's residents, too close to schools, daycares, afterschool, bird sanctuary. Could more trees be planted? Stupid idea- who is going to drive in their vehicle to legally smoke cannabis at any of these consumption sites??!! What are the hours of operation? Why does cannabis need a special place to light up? what about alcohol? what about injection parks? etc. Don't have any "pot parks". Do not approve Gathering to smoke pot in a designated space is wrong and sends the wrong message.
184/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I am not impressed that my †˜johnny on the spot’ councillor has put forward these suggestions. He does not speak for me. Keep illegal to consume cannabis in any form (smoking, vaping, or edibles) in public places. Add about 150 more locations. It is nowhere near a hotel and very few condos and apartments. That part of your criteria to choose the site does not hold water. What are the rules on smoking cannabis in the few nearby condos??
Its a stupid idea - make provision for indoor smoking lounges This location was not thought out. If marijuana legislation is meant to kept it away from children, you are forcing families to walk past if they wish to travel south on 12th to 11th. Keep these sites away from residential homes Does the city have any evidence that there is a need for this site? We already have problems with I toxicated brewery patrons in the area. Adding cannabis into the equation is a terrible idea. No, thanks for considering us cannabis users though Why on earth can't you treat cannabis like you do alcohol regarding consumption areas?
Run a business on 10 ave that backs onto this greenspace. It’s already been an issue this year with festivals, night markets & breweries. Illegal parking, littering and public intoxicatation is already an issue.
This is a terrible idea. Pandering to something that should not be pandered to. This is a privte property issue and not a public property issue with a controlled substance.
Will there be crosswalks added? Additional lighting will also be required as its poorly lit.
It’s the worst idea ever!!! I’ll be sure to set up a smoking pot corner in front of Gian Carlos home. Essentially the same idea!! no We are located adjacent to the proposed site on 11th Ave. The pilot will impact us directly.
Ransom pice checks (bi weekly or monthly l) to insure drivers aren’t toking
In general I think this is an awful idea. We don't have parks where we are allowed to drink so why do we need a spot for people to smoke pot? I am against this idea.
185/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
The city should allow cafes and/or smoke gardens in existing establishmemts. Treat cannabis like alcohol. At home, or in licensed facilities. If people don’t want to comply then apply consequences.
Why this location? People would be planning on intoxication in this location anyway, therefore the idea of designated drivers/biking/walking would be front of their minds.
This entire idea is without merit. Why would you only pick older established areas? Why only pick older established areas Why do cannabis consumers need a place to get together? There are not special parks for alcohol consumption. Garbage cans, and well lit Let people do their drugs in the privacy of their homes. I shouldn’t be forced to inhale the smoke and chemicals of someone else’s poor life choices.
At least it is near the new 17ave brt.
Put it away from parking, within 10 minute walking distance of a large number of apartment complexes to make it more accessible on foot.
Why was the ICA or BIA consulted on locations? Dumb idea. Chill Silly Hall! While I hold a neutral opinion about the legalization of marijuana, I am VEHEMENTLY opposed to the idea of a "pot park" anywhere in the city. Public consumption bylaws for marijuana should restrict its use to where tobacco AND alcohol are allowed.
Why is inglewood got human feces on street and by a unkept home?T2x
This is absolutely not something our City should be considering. This is almost as silly as all our "political correctness" that is taking over Canada.
I am completely against any public green space being used as a pot park, period.
By making it extremely diffcult to legally consume canabis in public spaces, you are ensuring people will ignore the bylaws and smoke it where ever they want.
186/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Canabis causes impairment and should be treated as alcohol. Public consumption areas should not be permitted anywhere. Please do not create these sights. There is no reason for this as no other substances like booze allow this. It will be a waste of my tax payer dollars to police them and I do not want to pay for it. Totally against it!!
This should be reviewed for issue every three months, and they should expire when cafes and edibles hit the market. Once this happens there is no need to smoke any drug in public. If you allow these what will this mean for alcohol in public?
As a tax payer I do not think that adding a pot smoking public area will help property values. Clearly this proposed policy will only reduce our property values. Why does the [removed] of this area seem determined to turn inglewood into a low income area
This seems like a poorly thought out, shoe horned solution to a problem that is coming up. I fully understand things take time, but shouldn’t we have a close look at this? Other cities have made it work with less resources. There are many things the city debates and scrutinizes closer than this
I think that if your going to limit the places of consumption for cannabis, then you she put more than 3 designated areas around the entire city. People can smoke on a side walk, and drink every 10feet in a bar.
Those in favor will rue the day they approve these proposed parks. [personal information removed], please give your head a shake for even thinking of such an idea.
How do the city councilors propose people get home after getting high, especially at night in the winter? There is a reason most people smoke pot in their residences. Mayor Nenshi, please don't allow this pilot. [personal information removed] is just trying to build his name awareness federally with the Liberals.
No, I disagree with marijuana use being used outside of an individuals home.
I actually won't indulge but I can't understand the logic behind this proposal. My comments apply to all the proposed sites. My comments apply to all proposed locations. I do not live in any of the proposed communities but feel it’s important that all Calgarians, regardless of their address, are able to voice their opinion of the [bad data transfer]. Whatever is decided in these neighbourhoods could set a precident in others.
187/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Can't marijuana be fatal to dogs if consumed? This probably applies to wildlife too? I don't suspect that pot smokers are super environmentalists who make sure to use trash cans. Will the city be providing an old hippy to monitor each greenspace and keep roaches and snack bags off the ground ?
Yes, Do you realize how big Calgary is?? You are proposing spots in 4 zones.. Do you really think people are going to travel all over the city to get to a permitted smoking zone? There is no way in hell, No one will be able to drive to these places because of the new BS cannabis driving laws.
It's a bit barren, and it would be nice to see it spruced up a bit because between the near by brewery, growth in the community, and pedestrian traffic off 9th this park will get a lot more public use if approved for a cannabis consumption space.
Why are you even proposing this in the first place? Who will provide oversight for the "proper" use of these parks as INJESTION / SMOKING sites. Are you increasing the budget for City Police to have more officers patrolling these sites? Why are you allowing consumption in ANY public area?!!!!!
Will the site be upgraded in any way? More seating, public art, reseeding? The consumption of cannibus is going to be legal you idiots. Why don’t u give Calgary 4 locations to consume hamburgers as well.
What ? The city is creating a fiasco at the expense of the tax payer!! Why is this location and the other 3 locations all in Ward 9? It is unfair for Inglewood in particular to but Ward 9 in general to have areas for legal drug users to congregate. (YES they are users of drugs) This notice has been called "Calgary's proposed locations" when in fact it is Gian Carlo Car will the place be monitored by police Designated areas are a joke. The ball has been dropped with marijuana legislation already and it’s not yet legal. Treat it just like cigarettes and impose a distance from doorways.
This will make walking in Inglewood unsafe for residents, kids in particular, old people and disabled. Please don't go ahead with this...bad idea...no one will gain from this idea.
Waste of time and tax payers money
188/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
My question is WHY are we wasting resources designating specific consumption areas in the city? If there are areas where you DO NOT want cannabis smoked, those should be designated. It would reduce wasting all this time and money trying to designate areas that consumers are unlikely to seek out.
Who are we trying to appease here?! Not the tax payers who will be covering the bill and dealing with all the fallout.
I don't agree with open consumption at all. It should be in an enclosed, ventilated place. We should not have to deal with the smells as general public. I do not support this idea Is the parking lot part of the designated area? If so, what are the implications for drugged driving? Is there increased risk of negative impacts because alcohol is available nearby? Designated cannabis sites will create problems for neighbours: second hand smoke, garbage, rowdiness. As Inglewoodians we need a break form all these things being forced on us. As said it i time for other hoods to step up!! How does the city enforce over 18 consumption in a parking lot? How does the city clean it? whose taxes pay for the maintenance and regulation, CPS increased service, etc?
Why is a parking lot, for a park, a natural area with few eyes on the street, become a place a legitimate place to get stoned?
Please consider other consumption areas in the city , city of Calgary should be a leader in legalization consumption options Would there be any shelter to protect people from cold and rain.
Two locations in Inglewood? Out of the entire city? Seems like an unfair burden on one community, especially for people who won’t partake even if legalized.
Like that it is transit accessible and in an area that has businesses that may benefit.
Why are 2 locations proposed for Inglewood? With the density of dwelling and number of renters it would make more sense to locate a potential consumption site in the beltline, rather than in a community with mostly single family dwellings. Why isn't pot being regulated same as alcohol consumption?
189/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Why not let people smoke cannabis wherever they currently smoke regular cigarettes? Let them go home, sit on a park bench, or by the river, stand in a back alley, outside buildings, walking down the street, etc. If it becomes an issue, then deal with the individuals and the issue at hand.
No location should be considered, they will continue to smoke where they do now, why cater to them???? Gian Carlo you are the worst councillor our ward has ever had. Why isn't Ramsay considered for this? Just don’t want them. I consume alcohol and will try cannabis once it is legal but it doesnt need to be in our public parks Cannabis is frequently used alongside other drugs as a method of moderating effects. Public consumption spaces will create signicant difficulty in monitoring and draw those with complex substance use issues to these spaces. Those under the influence of another drug accessing public space is likely.
It is a good option No conversation in advance of proposed sites- so this comes out of nowhere. 4 in entire city, 2 of them in Inglewood, none in Acadia, Forest Lawn and other ward 9 communities.With no conversation in advance with the community- already dealing with a lot of change and in reaction mode.
How can this be stopped? I am totally AGAINST this location as proposed. Putting this so close to multiple bars is a recipe for disaster, and will ruin the character of my neighbourhood. Not to mention proposed LRT site, and the city is pushing for a 4-story business/residential development right across the street.
If this space would not be considered as public alcohol consumption or public smoking area it should not be considered public cannabis consumption area. How will they police this, with users returning to their vehicles under the influence? How will it affect the local businesses, as this sort of activity can turn away potential customers? Is it worth enabling some to the detriment of others, when there are plenty of non- commercial areas for this?
How were cannabis users consuming the product so far? Designated areas are not needed, as long as users keep certain distance from schools and hospitals.
190/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Who is going to Police these parks? Who is going to clean up the garbage? Who is going to control parking and users driving high upon leaving? Who is going to prevent these places from becoming tent cities for the homeless cannabis user? And what about the suburbs where MOST apartments are located?
What kind of police presence will there be around the open consumption sites? How will we ensure that users aren't causing problems for the businesses in the area? I don't want the value of our property and business to be diminished because of increased crime in Inglewood .
Area seems out of the way; would not interfere with daily activities currently taking place in and around the area Why does Inglewood have 2 proposed sites? Why are all 4 sites in Ward 9? Does the clustering of sites (even for a pilot project) not create inequity amongst those who need to access these sites? What about those experiencing inequitable access to pot in other quadrants of the city?
Pls find some common sense This 'green space' isn't exactly easy on the on the eyes. Are there no other parks that would be more enjoyable to enjoy cannabis? This location seems to be an afterthought in it's inception.
None, I think its an excellent choice Kids will see this, I don't think they should. One site per community-users consuming frequently in a day- how practical is this solution really? It's not a solution if it's in principle only. Will the police be patrolling this area regularly to ensure this will not bring an increase of crime, such as break-ins and property theft which is already an issue here.
Do NOT do this, Gian-Carlo. Or the lowering of the speed limit. Start listening to your constituents!!! Why are the proposed sites not distributed across the city? Why would we voluntarily make Inglewood a magnet for open-air cannabis consumption and concentrate citywide, open-air use in the heart of our community? Will resources be allocated to maintain, clean and police this site and the area?
191/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
My comment is, other than me commenting on each of these three proposed sites and watching for new ideas for sites, THERE SHOULD BE NO SITES MADE OR PROVIDED FOR THE SMOKING OF CANNABIS in our city! Current smokers don't have problems finding places to smoke it so no need for special spots now.
I have no beef with the use of cannabis, but why do we need to encourage smoking at all? This is a set back to years of research on the dangers of smoking as well as the cost to health care. The city should be leaders and set a good example with this.
No This entire proposal is ridiculous. use should be in your own home not around others. I am not sure that this location is cohesive with the community feel that Inglewood and Ramsay have been currently creating. The area is becoming a place where families can enjoy brew pubs, festivals and the general vibe of an inner city community that is safe, interesting and safe.
The designated use for public consumption of cannabis seems entirely unnecessary.
Pot parks are not necessary at all Inglewood fought long and hard to clean up the area of homeless and hookers. I feel open consumption sites are going to bring back more [bad data transfer]
There are a lot of things we are not allowed to do in a park. I do not see why we need to be allowed to consume cannabis in a public park. I think private consumption sites will be just fine. I think it is ridiculous that only 1 ward is entertaining this concept. Obviously no other councillors are interested in putting it to their constituents which says something about the opinions of the council. how is being decided and who is deciding this ? I don't like the idea of having it across the street from 2 bars. It is also within your proposed transit hub, again, not appropriate. I feel it would become a magnet for other crimes to reenter Inglewood.
Why the disproportionate representation of Inglewood?
192/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
None Refer to Question 2 1. Why were only 3 communities in Ward 9 chosen? 2. Why were 2 sites chosen in Inglewood & not 1? 3. What's the message being presented to Calgarians & outsiders about Inglewood? Is it IngleWOOD or IngleWEED?
If it's legal it should be handled like tobacco or alcohol. I disagree with concentrating users into consumption sites. Alcohol is not allowed in any public park - why should cannabis?? While I feel that a designated area may have to be considered, I feel public parks are NOT the right location. And if so, who is monitoring these sites for adherence to bylaws and overall safety of everyone exposed/involved?
I do not understand why these designated sites are desirable at all. I don't understand the desire to focus use into just a few locations. If it's going to be legal to use outside why not everywhere? If it's going to be banned in most places, why not all places?
No designated pot smoking areas are necessary. Let people smoke pot wherever they are allowed to smoke cigarettes. Get rid of this proposal immediately To close to school, homes, and the city pool regularily targeted by users so just encouraging more theft and break-ins in the community for users with no funds.
INGLEWOOD II
(GREEN SPACE ADJACENT TO WILDLANDS PARKING LOT ON NINTH AVE. S.E. PAST 22ND ST.)
1. How would this consumption area be of benefit to you?
It wouldn't. While it is the closest to my home in west Beltline, it is much too far from where I live to be beneficial. This area is close to my home, and would be great easy access place for consuming cannabis No I could consume cannabis here Same as above. people are already smoking more then 70% It would be great to consume here see above comments Same as above.
193/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I am a homeowner so this area would be of no benefit. This location is close to my home If and only if I want to consume cannabis and I'm located at this Green space, will it actually be useful for me; and that same argument can be used for any of the 4 designated sites equally. I would likely break the law, as written, vs. travel to consume It would not be. I live in temple It would not. See above Designated area is good. It would not It would provide people with a place to consume cannabis No benefit I don’t think it would be. The consumption areas are an interesting idea but I need more information to be convinced. Why not handle it more like alcohol? It's ok, not super central though and no seating or anything. Not at all None It wouldn't be of any benefit. I object to Cannabis and Smoking in general. I often walk along the Bow River so it will be nice to have somewhere close by for use. No benefit at all It wouldn’t No benefit. this wouldnt benefit me in anyway as i dont go to this area of the city at all. None, this is a natural area, I have safety concerns (fire, garbage, etc). As well as this is a mixed use area, children are present No benefit It would ensure that I completely avoid the community going forward. It would not benefit or detract from me no benefit I use the city’s biking paths frequently and this is a location I like to enjoy the outdoors at. No It wouldn't It doesn't benefit anyone It wouldn't. Not at all. This would not benefit anyone. Telling people that’s okay to get high in public is absurd. I wouldn't! There is no benefit to utilizing public spaces for drug use No benefit whatsoever.
194/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It won’t. I will consume at home. It won’t as it’s not accessible for anyone in the NW It would not Same as above, no benefits, just potential issues It would not benefit me. Allow my to access my medication while in the area Not! I would not use this area to smoke pot as access for myself is not convenient. These areas are not places I would want to go hang out for a night so the transportation to and from are cost prohibitive of no benefit Again, it wouldn't. Need area for legal outdoor use It wouldn’t. Too difficult to access. no benefit I wouldn’t want this park in my back yard your attracting various types of people to a public area I can't drink there, let the druggies not be in public at all bad idea see above i bike ride and walk for exersize and would enjoy stopping for a puff and perhaps meet others in my travels It wouldn’t! None It isn't. These sites are stupid and still playing on reefef mafness NONE. THIS IS A NUISANCE None It won't, I don't do drugs. No benefit. None- I’ll smoke at home This consumption area would be of no benefit to me. It would negatively impact my life. Does not benefit me. There would be NO BENEFIT to me from making this a consumption area. There should not be public consumption. never place them better and get actually public opinion when it comes to location . this is a terrible attempt by the city to gelp welcome cannabis into canada . do a better job and start asking an age group thats roughly 18- 25 .people who actually smoke It would not benefit me there is absolutely no benefit. this consumption area would be a detriment to the community
195/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
No It will be detrimental to our family of five as we spend as much time as possible in and around Calgary's recreational areas and green spaces as they are intended as per the city's website statements Once legal it would be nice to be able to smoke pot somewhere other than just your back yard/ inside your house On the odd occasion I may perhaps use a vaporizer and go for a walk in the park, but only during summer months (that's 3 months of the year) see other question. I don't smoke, but would prefer people to not smoke close to me .. It would not benefit me or my community. We already have problems with partying and camping in this area. Its not It will not benefit me in any way. No benefit just more break-ins, and safety issues for people in the neighbour that already has a problem with campers and drug deals happening in the parking lot where the site is proposed This would be an extreme detriment to this neighbourhood. We are already inundated by the number of vagrants who set up illegal camps in this area, who are involved in criminal activity. Our homes have been vandalized enough. IT IS NOT WANTED HERE! Too far away Would not in any way. It would not. I do not want to see cannabis consumption in any public space. Cannabis consumption should be treated the same as alcohol consumption. This would have no benefit to me, my family or the people who live in this section of inglewood. There are no amenities or resources in this area and it makes no sense to bring people down to this part of the community for Cannabis consumption This is terrible! It’s all residential right there. You are just asking for camps and problems coming to thetbpark of inglewood by putting it there. Makes no sense. Love the safe space. I wouldn't. There are NO benefits with this area. As a home owner near by I stronly oppose it and will fight in any manner available NOT to have this near my home and my small children!!! Would be close to where I am most days WONT. I dont need it neither does the city. Definately not a small community that is trying to revitalize and increase our community image. No benefits at all. Dangerous, reckless and foolish I will not get any benefit, but will certainly be affected by it as I and my family frequent the bird sanctuary and nature centre No benefit There is no benefit to this proposed location and this will hurt our community. It won’t.
196/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It will not, it will attract different random type if people, will also increase traffic and most likely making it less save for neighbouring houses. It wouldn't and do NOT support my City Hall working to accomodate this. We are a small community whos access in the next few years is getting restricted and you want to push more traffic in here? Amazingly! I work nearby so it would be very convenient. It wouldn't It wouldn’t! It wouldn’t. It wouldn’t. It will simply allow what is currently a quiet area of town enjoyed by wildlife lovers and dog walkers to become a mess. No It won’t Won’t No benefit, quite the opposite Nothing positive about this proposal. It would not and should not be considered. Your questionaire should be more general "Parks across Calgary" and not specific to communities. Poor structure It would not but to each their own would not benefit me at all It would bit only 4 places to smoke stupid it will be legal and telling where to smoke None See above, no benefit. It wouldn't NOT in my neighborhood It would not, nor would it benifit any Calgarian, if people want to consume pot they can do so in there own homes or paid establishments No It would not It is away from my house and would therefore have pot smokers congregate and create noxious fumes away form my residence No Absolutely no benefit No benefits whatsoever. It wouldn't. No It wouldn't No
197/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Its too far away from most of the community and the park is a block away from a school no benefit Not in any way. Not at all No identifiable benefit. Not benefit It won't. Totally against this. Tax payers money can be spent else where. NO benefit none It would not be of benefit as I would be unlikely to use this location A legal place to consume cannabis great location. I go there regularly already. NO BENEFIT AT ALL !!! No benefit I can discreetly drive away afterwards This area is in the SE of Calgary, the quadrant that I also live in, so may be convenient It would not. In fact, given its somewhat isolated location, I see nothing but an invitation to criminality. It won't No benefit. Just no objection It would not be of benefit to me. No. This is beneficial to me because it is not near my home. I don't want to have to be exposed to cannabis. Smoking /inhaling any smoking materials is not good for you. It would not wouldnt be No, not at all!!!! It'd be fine. No benefit to me. No positive benefit. yes It may be a place to meet others It's too far away. No benefit to me. close to my home Inglewood is a great location for tourists (and locals who don't own their own property, I suppose), who won't be able to legally consume cannabis elsewhere.
198/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It wouldn’t benefit me at all but it’s a good trial space for public cannabis consumption. It will not benefit anyone who works or lives in Inglewood. Why would the city even consider this? It provides a space similar to a bar where people can come together and engage. No benefit at all. This is an area that already has issues with homeless camps and illegal drug users.. Seems like allowing this would only incourage more of that. It doesn't benefit anyone. Cannabis is harmful to all humanity even second or third-hand. No one should be exposed to it in It won’t Absolutely none Not benefits at all! No Too far away for me to go to. I’m not going to drive there and if I’m biking, I’m not going to stop there to use it. Not None. Residential housing across the street. Just down 9th ave a couple of blocks from an elementary school It would not. Its a great location It would not benefit me. not at all It wouldn't It is of no benefit to me. Many of the houses across the street have small children. This will negatively impact their health. It will ruin my property value. No benefit. This area not any benefit to me. No benefits It wouldn’t It would not This would have no benefit I have young children, live 1/2 block from this location, and we go to the Wildlands, Bird Sanctuary and bike paths frequently. I don't find any benefit to me for the consumption area being here. It would not. It would not. It would not. No benefit whatsoever No benefit of any kind, only potential outcomes are negative. No benefit whatsoever It would not.
199/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It is not a benefit. I do not believe there should be public consumption sites. It wouldn't provide any benefits. This is a ridiculous idea. No There is no benefit to me. If I lived in the area - I would be very angry with this proposal. No benefit. No It will not It would not benefit me in anyway. Quite the opposite, I believe it will encourage drug dealing in the Parks. Please take the time to study what has happened in Colorado since legalization. No benefit. We wont ve around thst area or consider buying s home there as we did twenty years ago I don't believe this location would benefit very many people at all! I do not agree with any green space being designated as a Pot Park. it wouldn't it would be a cost/negative impact. No benefit to me, only downside in my opinion. No excuse to suggest 2 locations in Inglewood while he proposes none in Ramsay. But then again that's where his young child goes to school... Only more harm to our peaceful neighbourhood! It wouldn't. This whole program seems ridiculous to me. Whether you are for or agains the legalization this seems like a mis-use of tax- payer money. No benefit. I live in a house, so could safely and legally consume cannabis at home. This site would not benefit me This will not benefit me in any way. There is no benefit to me in any way. It wouldn't, None over the proposed areas do.. It is miles and miles from my home and would be of no benefit to me. It wouldn't. Nor would it attract me. It feels very barren and scrappy. NO benefit AT ALL to me. It would be of no benefit to me, nor likely anyone else. None. Not at all!! This site is of benefit to no one. This is a really bad idea. No one will benefit from these parks, they will be unsafe for residents, especially kids and teenagers. Also unsafe for the pot smokers too! I won't, it's too far away. This is an awful idea- why would you propose such a thing anywhere let alone a family oriented community? NO
200/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It wouldn't. No benefit to me. I do not plan on consuming cannabis. It wouldn't. I live in the neighborhood. See above. It won’t At this point, I don't see this site as either a benefit or detriment to me personally. Not. I am opposed to idea as I think it will attract stoned people and affect property values Absolutely no benefit, this area is en route to the Inglewood bird sanctuary. It wouldn’t got proposed area feedback mixed up- wildlands parking lot so faulty in so many ways carpark=driving cars=driving stoned=driving stoned passed CWS and Piitoyias School It is out of the way and wouldn't have a negative impact on me. If there has to be a site in Inglewood, these seems like the better option. Less centralized - not right in the middle of all the foot traffic in Ramsey and Inglewood. No need for two!! within walking distance for friends/family. Love that we can try these out. Way to go Calgary! Please see my comments for Proposed Area #1 Not at all !!! People should be consuming in their own homes. There should be bylaws in place to protect people who don't want to put up with second hand smoke and smell. My neighbours already smoke the crap and I have to put up with the skunk smell. None. not in any way No benefit. It will not, why would I drive to the wild lands parking lot passing a public school to smoke a joint? there is no public transit serving the area within 800 meters. There would be no benefit I struggle to find any benefit to this site being a designated cannabis consumption site. I support public consumption areas as the bylaws restricting consumption to only private property does not consider renters, condo bylaws etc It doesn't affect me. I support the use of public spaces for cannabis consumption versus the alternative of people looking for areas and negatively affecting individuals who would otherwise steer clear of cannabis. No apparent benefit but a good idea No consumption at all to be allowed It won't NOT AT ALL, I thought it was an episode of This Is That it is so ridiculous and ill-conceived. IT Would not be of benefit to me.
201/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I don't consume cannabis but I support the end of prohibition and the rights of all Calgarians and visitors to consume a legal substance if they chose to even if they do not own a home in Calgary. No benefit. It wouldn't. This would not benefit me. Not a benefit to me. Absolutely not. In fact, this proposed location is a detriment to both community residents and users alike. Increased traffic and drug use in the area will negatively impact community safety and the site is too remote to access on foot. The site choice makes absolutely no sense for anyone involved. It is ridiculous to limit legal cannabis in public spaces. If people are not allowed to use it in a rental or condo, how can you expect citizens to travel to one of four parks? You want people driving stoned? Not also fine It would not. It would give me a safe place to go if cannabis usage is banned in my building It wouldn't. I applaud the city being proactive & appreciate the opportunity to comment. I have concerns & no solutions. I'm not in favour of public sites for safety & practicality concerns. One site per community- freq consumers thru out the day- practical? If not practical, is it a solution? It would not be a benefit to me in ANY way. In fact, it would be to my detriment, as a resident of the area. (Could the wording of this question be more neutral? It is odd to assume that these consumption areas are intrinsically beneficial.) It would not benefit me. Not at all. It will not. No benefit for regular residents. It would not be of any benefit to me. Provides a consumption space close to the beautiful river. It wouldn't. Would not benefit me at all. This consumption area would be of ZERO benefit to me. NO. And why would it "benefit" *anyone* in the neighbourhood? We're not allowed to smoke tobacco products in public places, so we do it in our backyards, or homes. Why should it be any different for weed? Less of a benefit than Area 1 if that is possible. I do not smoke or plan to in the future. it would not benefit me ... It certainly would not be of benefit to me.
202/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
No In nothing Not In no way would this be of benefit. more people-would feel safer walking my dog. It wouldn’t. No Benefit to residents & questionable for businesses How does a having a pot park make for a great neighborhood? Are pot smokers really the desired role models we want for children & young adults? How will a site be chosen if no community volunteers a space? Are there more suitable sites? No, I have private property options available to me. It would not. It wouldn't It would not be of any benefit. I live too far away and wouldn't want to drive there, smoke up, then drive home. Nobody should be doing this. Zero benefit - was any thought or consideration given to Suncor’s thoughts - aren’t they the site owner? Why was the community not consulted? Why was the Wildlands Society not consulted? Not at all beneficial.. I already have people sleeping and smoking on my property, I don't believe the City of Calgary should get involved in this. Is it not against City bylaws to be drunk in public why allow people to be high in public None - hate it!! It would be a detriment. It would not benefit me. It angers me. No benefit to our neighbourhood It wouldn't. Inglewood has enough problems being close to the rampat [sic] drug abuse spilling over from East Village without this stupid idea going forward.
It wouldn't! There is no benefit to our neighbourhood, and I think it's very sneaky that gave/the city gave the neighbourhood from August 23 - September 7 to voice our concerns.
It wouldn't. There is no benefit to the neighbourhood. This is a family friendly neighbourhood and it's not being taken into consideration when the decision was made to propose this park.
It only benefits potheads. It's taken years to clean up the neighbourhood & stupid ideas like this will erase that progress & drive down property values.
This idea is no benefit to anyone but degenerate drug addicts despite the liberal's stupid idea to legalize. Really slimy to try and push this through.
203/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
There is no benefit to my neighbourhood. Instead of leaving a park to be a public space for the neighbourhood to enjoy. The laws aren't clear and rather than engage the neighbourhood this idea is rushed with little to no research into if this is beneficial or how it will affect the neighbourhood. There is no benefit at all. Not at all.
2. Are there any issues we should consider with this proposed location?
If anything screams out "reinforce stigma," it is putting a proposed cannabis use area in a parking lot. seems like a good place Make it citywide nope It's way too far from any populated area. I think the other location on 11th Ave is better. no Seating Should be more central/populated. This location is a bit isolated, isn't it? Far from prying eyes. While that sounds nice I would be more concerned about poor behaviour at this location, as well as safety . This location is near the end of a dead-end street, across the street from residential housing, near homeless encampments and of low visibilty from the street. Not a welcoming or convenient location for users, and likely to cause negative impact on area. no It's a really small area to fit 1/4 of the cannabis users in Calgary. Are you hoping that most users are home owners? If I can walk down the street and smoke a cigarrette, then why can't I walk down the street and eat a cookie? this parking area is used by staff at a dependant handicapped group home. they may have issues with it. It's not near temple There are people like myself who are allergic to smoke of any kind and will not be able to visit parks where public consumption of cannabis is allowed. Taxpayers should not have to pay for cleanup and stiff fines should be issued to those that do litter. See above Don't see any. No places in the NW or West This is a location frequented by families we should not be promoting cannabis use to children.
204/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It is not very accessible by transit and is located off of busy roads that aren't very pedestrian friendly - if the expectation is that people will consume intoxicants in this space, I think we should also expect (and try to mitigate) the risk of DUIs see comments for site 1 Proxy to schools & Visibility, it’s not a super visible area and it’s away from anything public ( restaurants, bars, hotels, etc) and tucked in a residential area. There are already a little t of issues with camps, etc, it doesn’t seem like the best fit. Just that there are no benches or seating and it's kinda dirty over there. The location is separated from other services and public places, making the area a site specifically for consumption and little else. People will travel to this and other designated areas purely to smoke cannabis, encouraging more dangerous consumption. The Inglewood wild lands and bird sanctuary is frequented by many children including summer camps and city run family activities. This is too close to a family use area. Smoking of any kind should not be allowed in public spaces. Too close to Inglewood Bird Sanctuary. Lack of seating Second hand smoke that would occur in this green space would totally eliminate my use of this park Too close to Inglewood Bird Sanctuary. Area frequented by young families and children I don’t understand this locations purpose/benefit. It’s mostly surrounded by single family homes. People would be driving here to consume cannabis. There is a school just up the street and there are already many illegal encampments south of here I certainly would feel uncomfortable entering the wildlands to walk with a cannabis consumption area. Talk about an unwelcome, undesirable designation. no Fire, garbage, unsuitable area. It should not be considered as its too isolated. Property values will be de-valued Parking. Access. Public consumption should not be allowed. If I can’t get drunk in a park, whyshould people be allowed to get high? I like that there is parking nearby while still being isolated you cannot drink in public so why is it ok to get high in public Not that City Hall listens to th tax payers - but there should be NO - repeat - NO smoking cannabis in public - period. Close to residential area, public school, bike paths and bird sanctuary. limited access How in the world can you make it ok to use Cannabis here, but it still be illegal to use alcohol in the same location?!?! Ban smoking all together. Yes. The smell and smoke from marijuana is horrible and is going to make Calgary a less- attractive place to live. Why are you advocating the use of drugs in public places? It makes the site unusable to families and those who don't use this drug
205/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Lower property values and the skunk-like stench of pot. Hordes of undesirable people using harder drugs, trashing of the area, noise, increased traffic. People gathering to party and the smell of canabis should not be a burden to the adjacent residents The city should not be designating public land for this purpose Same as above, a parking lot where people will drive to and from high putting us at risk on our roads and sidewalks?? It is not necessary to have a proposed location. Concentrating consumption in one area feels discriminatory. I cannot discretely access my medicine when being forced into a recreational area. No need for public consumption places! This is an area right by the bird sanctuary - does it seem like a good idea to subject the birds to pot smoke? You're not even supposed to use non-stick cookware around birds because of their fragile lungs but a pot park seems like a good idea? Without 24/7 on-site monitoring, there is no feasible way of ensuring compliance or that users would respect limits, boundaries or rules in general. Are the buildings close by houses? Warehouses? Businesses? No Accessiblity to general public. fire hazard, littering, noise complaints, crime I wouldn’t want a bunch of pot smokers in my back yard Children and my health and safety There is no logic to this spot, it is nowhere near where the smokers hang out. Inglewood already has issues in the wild lands park with camps being set up there. Was council stoned when they decided to come up with these ideas? DON'T CONSIDER THIS AREA OR ANY OTHER Should be sold and consumed like alcohol either in the establishment or at home Ya why do we need a public space for smoking pot? Will the city be putting in wine and bear parks. Lets make everything accessible to young children, get em started early - I guess is the city's plan. Community look and feel The whole idea is crazy How will the city ensure that there will not be an increase in impaired driving in the area as a result of this site? I don’t think this site should be considered. Why should non-consumers of cannabis be forced to avoid this area because public cannabis consumption is endorsed here? It is irresponsible to have public consumption of a drug, especially with secondhand smoke and no supervision. no ones gonna go these . if im lighting a joint jn a park and not hurting anyone im not gonna suddenly say dude we need tk be jn designated smoke area .
206/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It is near a pathway and the Inglewood bird sanctuary. This would prevent me from wanting to visit those locations. lack of eyes on the street, lack of survelleince by other uses, too isolated; who regulates the use and polices the site?? Pot parks! Not a good idea Issue 1 - Additional litter that will be created by consumers Issue 2 - Who will ensure that no remnants from smoking a joint will be carelessly discarded? nope It's too remote. Who would use it, especially in winter? You can't drive yourself there and back again. I don't think, it will be used? why would anyone go that far out of their way for smoking? the same people who self medicate might not even have a car (not the ones in my neighbourhood, ramsay).. or would choose to sit in their own vehicule, front steps Do not agree with the designation of crappy green spaces for this purpose at all. Its across from some very nice houses, this is a grass land area, are you prepared for grass fires The idea of providing designated outdoor Cannabis consumption sites is foolish and should be abandoned. This area already had all sorts of drug deals happening, many cars travelling far too fast forthe neighbourhood. This area is full of single family homes meaning that people will need to drive over and then drive back after consuming. Doing drugs&driving It's too close to a wildlife SANCTUARY where we are trying to provide a safe place for our wildlife. Children, families, pets & education groups will be at risk to the noxious 2nd hand smoke and the irresponsible disposable of roaches and paraphernalia. I think its very fat and so sucluded that it may attrack the wrong crowd. Business classy people that want to enjoy will not go there This is too fancy. Maybe you could clear out a spot for us at the dump or we could find a bridge to huddle under. This is very close to the parking lot for the bird sanctuary, which many families frequent with their young kids. Including my own. I vehemently disagree with a cannabis smoking area here, as much as I would an open alcohol area in the same location. Cannabis consumption should be treated the same as alcohol consumption and not be allowed in any public space. This is an area that has been plagued by homeless camps and vagrant behaviour. The community has worked diligently to ensure these spaces are family and user friendly. There is no logic in my mind as to why this would have been selected for this purpose Its residential. It’s where camps have been found. It’s no where near other businesses. Very strange place for this. No It's in the middle of nowhere. What's the use? Nobody is going to go out of their way to consume cannabis here. It is too close to homes. This is a dead end street and we have already too much errant trafgic here. Besides this is far from any condos. Are people supposed to drive here, smoke weed and then drive away high??? That's "smart"!
207/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Traveling from across the city to get there (not gonna happen) No issies Yes see all the above answers. This is yet another initative that impacts negatively on our community. Too close to a family neighbourhood. Public consumption should be outlawed, equally as bad a cigarette consumption. The area is adjacent to the bird sanctuary which is frequented by families with kids and from where many kids and families walk towards Inglewood. Exposing minors to the smell, smoke or simply visual of smoking is undesirable and should be avoided This is stupid and offensive, do you permit drinking in public places? This is next to the Inglewood bird sanctuary. Instead of a peaceful nature area it will be next to a concentration of drug users. Consumption and driving. Yes, distance to residents type of families and houses. Are there any studies done how long the smell prrsists and how far can it go? Sone of the by rules coming arr useless not protecting kids and families. Yes put it in your own backyards. 12 mile coulee area? Or the Nose Hill area? or hey how about the airport area. Convenient for the 16M travellers, already built to support traffic, away from residents and schools and parks. NO I swear you forget winter is a yearly event that you can't feel wrapped I'm warmth of taxpayers dollars. That you waste This isn’t far from a school and it’s right on a nature area. It’s such a small area of town you’re asking 1/4 of Pot smokers in Calgary to come to smoke in such a tiny area it’s just asking for the area to turn to dirt!! It’s a quiet area, leave it! Same as above This area being essentially hidden and out of the way will become a litter ground and vandalised because it won’t be policed. It’s a shame due to it being such a nice area. It’s also a very short walk from a school. No Children, seniors Smoking in public around children and those with chronic diseases will negaticely effect the neighbourhood. You can’t drink alcohol outside, why can you get high? City doesn't own this land, has owner given public consent for this use? Activity would be conflict with access by minors to the Wildlands gate at south edge of parking lot. Encampments pose security risk to If....we have to have it...... the same laws and rules as for Alcohol should apply. Do not allow Questionaire should cover questions regarding across Calgary not just Inglewood Yes-it is 3 blocks from the elementary school l work at. The area is within our walking field trip area and we would be by there often. We also use the fields there for learning Blackfoot traditions with elders. Children walk past there to go to school!
208/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 once you allow this to take place in open area you are going to bring out more questions from people to allow other drugs in this area and combining a drug community in one area. so wrong No Yes, but not just at this location. Cannabis consumption should be subject to the same rules as alcohol and tobacco. This will affect users of the park, who often are there with their children, regardless one goes to a park to enjoy the smell of nature not dead skunks. I am sure that the proximity to residents will not be appreciated either. It should not be allowed Keep it far from my neighborhood here is a parking lot here which would imply people will drive, park, consume and drive away under the influence posing a danger to anyone on the road. Adjacent to most affluent part of Inglewood. Too close to Bird sanctuary. Too many animals and toddlers may use area. Cannabis should not be consumed in public areas None that I can think of This entire idea is ridiculous. No public spaces just like we don’t have public alcohol parks. Right next to bike pathway and Bird Sanctuary and across the street from houses??? This is ridiculous! Please, we do not need public cannabis consumption. Potential fire hazard, danger to wildlands, wildlife sanctuary, railway property. Litter of roaches etc. Raunchy air quality for others yo breath as they access the wildlands park and sanctuary. People wander as they smoke, this is a natural area. Why are you allowing public consumption of the intoxicating substance Cannabis, but not alcohol? Lots of issues. It’s a public area Yes, we already have issues with traffic speeding through the school zone and then the playground right after it. Add this site and driving under the influence its a problem waiting to happen. Would be better suited in a more active area with restaurants Cannabis smoke spreads a long way from point of use and is extremely potent and an irritant to many. Any outdoor use is inappropriate. WHY near the Wildlands???????? This area is a protected area as habitat, and though the parking lot is proposed, you can bet people are going to wander in, potentially leaving garbage, butts and FIRE. How stupid a choice is this site??????? The park is quite large and very close to a school. It is also not very acessable to most people unless you drive, which would promote driving high. public impact, resources needed to 'police' complaints Consumption should be restricted to the user's private property, not on public property. No public consumption Too remote and not enough people traffic to self-regulate behaviours. Would require people to drive to the location, meaning higher likelihood of impaired driving FROM the site.
209/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Too close to the bird sanctuary - people could litter and ruin the sanctuary, again rail road track near by dangerous for intoxicated individuals- ruin the peace and beauty of the area - I would stop visiting the park lands Same as above. The idea of designated sites is a bad one. Totally against this. Tax payers money can be spent else where. open areas would promote under the influence driving public cannabis consumption is a terrible idea, we do not allow public alcohol consumption, why would we allow this?? Removed from commercial amenities, would require consumers to walk a long distance to commercial area to patronize local businesses No Nope this location looks fantastic Why would the City use Parkland to aid in the consumption of a mind altering substance???? If this is approved, when we will we have City approvedparkland sites to consume beer, wine or other alcohol. If consuming intoxicants in a public place is going to be allowed, alcohol consumption should also be allowed. Alchohol consumption has a smaller area of impact on non-users in the vicinity than marijuana smoke, which is far-travelling and obnoxious. Maybe extend it to the entire green space, where people will actually be smoking Not from my perspective yes - it's isolated (see the previous point), but it's also stupid to again corral people in areas so they can smoke in public. Again, let people smoke in public like they can with cigarettes. Have more throughout The proximity of the pathway means children would be witnessing the consumption a fair bit. Not that it'll turn them into consumers, just that I could see the location being uncomfortable for some parents. Otherwise it's not like that lot is used for much I am a bike commuter. I would prefer not to smell more cannabis when I am enjoying the pathways in this area. It's not transit accessible and a far walk from any dispensary meaning a higher likelihood of people driving there and anyone who gets inebriated there will have to drive back through a school zone which is an unacceptable risk to the area's children. That it is a dumb idea should consider pot cafes maybe Children use the pathway and visit the wildlands all year long. The day cares in area would lose out on valuable off site excursions, licensing does not allow children to be around smoking and children walking would need to walk past that area ,not good! No I'd vote against all 4 locations. I don't think there is a need to provide outdoor space for marijuana consumption. I'd suggest waiting until we know more about the rollout before making these decisions. Think about the residents in this area. Their property values have a potential to decrease. General public does not want to be living next to an open consumption site. Plus It is right by recreational paths ways/summer camps. Not so healthy
210/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
No, seems like a good place for it Holy moly, this is a sketchy area. It's completely inaccessible by transit, really close to the wildlands (fire concerns for sure) and also just so seculded. I don't live far from there but I wouldn't go there just to smoke with others. Weird area. Yes, can we please have more sites across the city? Yes. This is too close to the Wildlands Park. There are often illegal camps set up in Wildlands Park and this site may attract more. This is also right off a primary route for bicycle commuters, dog walkers, etc. Again, the pungent smell will be an issue. none that i can think of Looks fine. Looks good but where are people supposed to sit? Will there be a seating area? Yes, this will be a huge set back for Inglewood & Ramsay Schools, daycares, afterschools, and retailers Potential for it to become a breeding ground for illegal activities, such as other drug use and dealing. Children frequently are at the Wildlands and also use the adjacent path. This seems far too close to where children playing/using facilities Too close to residences No location is appropriate Too close to residences and yet secluded enough to encourage nuisance behaviour. Parks are for recreational purposes, not for alcohol, canabbis, etc. Our kids and teens are there to enjoy the outdoors not to watch people getting high or intoxicated. This is an area used by people walking their dogs. There has been an increase of emergencies pets consuming pot. How will this be safeguarded? It is far removed from any hotels, apartments or condos. Why make that a selection criteria for choosing a site and then select the Wildlands?? Right near the Mustard seed ! Contribute to the poor why not make them worse - great The school 2 blocks away. The children that live across the street. People driving to this location as transit it not a priority here There are children living directly across the street from the site. They need to walk down 9 avenue past the site to get to school None I oppose Pot Parks. buts, fires, drugged out smokers, obnoxious people Yes. I don't think pot should be consumed in public areas! Currently smoking at an entrance to mall or on hospital grounds isn't enforced. If you want to consume pot do it at home! This is too close to houses with small children. hildren. There are also a lot of families that walk near this area. We don't allow alcohol or smoking cigarettes consumption parks. So why allow cannabis. Major liability issues as how does one get back home. Please have common sense and allow nothing. Keep a park a park for everyone to enjoy. there should nbeno consumption sites
211/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
There are too many residential kids live at this quiet place, people running, play, walk with dog around, also there is a bird sanctuary & nature centre beside here. So I don’t consider to choose this location. High traffic School hour restrictions If you allow cannabis to be consumed at the space then allow people to consume alcohol as well. Make it a park for drinkers and smokers. A parking lot is not a place to encourage gathering - this is kit a green space. Will encourage people to smoke in the adjacent woodlands, risk of fire. My children, ages 6 and 9 frequently play here, using the adjacent path and exploring the wikdlds Green space being used in a family unfriendly manner. People stinking up the air There are few renters and no condo/apartment units within 3 to 4 blocks of this location (which is the intended user-base). I would suggest instead going to the Pearce Estate Park, closer to many condos/townhome, bike paths, river pathway, etc this is in the middle of no where, next to a parking lot. Seems to encourage driving to this destination and driving away. Who would WALK across the field to smoke? Lets be honest, they will just smoke as soon as they step on to the field. why bother? The Inglewood Wildlands does not meet the "Not in an area where other site users must pass to access another part of the site (e.g. pathways or park entrance)" threshold. Per lease agreement with land owner, Inglewood Wildlands is clearly marked as follows: Park Closed 23:00-05:00 Hours. No Dogs, No Bicycles. There is no lighting at this location, which given the level of illegal encampment activity that has in no way been addressed by City of Calgary, and the remote location, poses a substantial safety hazard at this site Don't agree with legalizing pot Is this part of the Bend in the Bow park plan? I bet this wasn't in the public consultation. This is nowhere near hotels or any rental accommodations. Do you seriously expect people to drive here and then drive home under the influence? Do not agree with legalizing pot The Inglewood Wildlands is a former refinery site where the ground is so badly polluted that remediation continues to this day. The risk of a wildfire in this tinder dry location is not to be underestimated. How are users to get to and from the site? The site should be closer to a police station so it can be more easily monitored. Keep the site away from homes and other places with people. Depending on air currents people are going to have to smell this. I don't agree with this as a site. We already have significant issues in the Wildlands with homeless people and camps. Providing Legal consumption site here when we can't seem to manage the petty crime and homeless issues is only going to compound this By putting it next to a parking lot you are encouraging people to drive there and then drive away impared. The only way out of this location is to drive thru a playground zone and by an elementary school. YOU ARE INCREASING THE RISK OF IMPARED DRIVING. Alcohol cannot be consumed in a public park - why should cannabis? How will these sites be policed to ensure only cannabis is used? It has the potential to become a drug hang out for more insidious illegal drugs and criminals.
212/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Down the street from a elementary school, kids on the street. No apartment dwellers or hotels around, how are people going to get there? Drive? This is a very sill idea. Do you really think that is necessary? It's within easy walking distance to a school!!! Not to mention how many thousands of kids and families use Inglewood bird sanctuary! Have you considered the health risk to the birds your trying so hard to protect? Why is Inglewood even considering public areas for consumption of cannabis? Our community has only just managed to shake off the low life image with needle drop boxes in our parks. But [personal information removed] wants to maintain that image by encouraging drug use. Please see comments below. The horrible smell that blows around esp with outside area. Cant smell beer from afar! Area will again go downhill and attract vagrants. Have tou not been to Seattle lately? Or pirtland or denver this is the parking lot to an extremely nature-sensitive area. the grass is often tinder dry and would only take one lit but or match to send the whole area up in flames. it is not near any transit and not practical to walk to from "condos" mentioned. Public intoxication. People can buy cannabis oils if they live in rentals, this doesn't limite anyone from using cannabis. We don't want to see alcohol used in public, so we shouldn't allow cannabis, a substance that causes intoxication. I do not understand why [personal information removed] would propose an area this close to single family homes, the Bird Sanctuary where there is summer camp programming and close to a nearby public elementary school. No benefit to the family oriented side of Inglewood. Pick a lot by SoBow if that's your intent. This is a neighbourhood of a lot of children. We have enough troubles educating our children already. Please don't bring more bad things to us. Umm so many its hard to think where to start. Its a wildlands park, a nature preserve it's across form residential houses, unfair to put this where people may congregate and disrupt the residences. It is no where near any condos, the reason the City is stating these are required? It's across the street from residential homes, many with kids. There's no condos or apartments nearby, so people would need to travel there. Are we encouraging people to smoke up in front of kids and then drive home intoxicated? This is not an appropriate place for this. The close proximity to residents with children( impaired driving) , and that people walk there dogs in that area. There have already been problems with pets ingesting dropped forms of cannibus. Yes, how it will negatively affect the school children and residents who live in this area. We have had several issues over the years keeping this area of inglewood safe from fentanyl users and squatter camps. This will decay our neighbor hood and all the city's positive work on the inner city. I am concerned with impaired driving coming from this location, it seems too far from public transit options.
213/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Canabis consumption occurring here leaves only one route out, driving along the 9 ave bike path and through the playground and school zone. I doubt many people would walk to this location, it is not close to anything, including places to get snacks afterward. There are issues with all proposed locations..They makes absolutely no sense,, You want people to go to some random spot outside and stand there with a bunch of strangers and smoke.. I'm not looking for people to communicate with thanks.. I should be able to use a legal substance anywhere in Calgary We don't allow alcohol to be used outdoors all over. cannabis should be treated like alcohol. Used in designated indoor establishments & your own home. Is this proposed location on private land owned by Suncor? Are there any fire hydrants in the area? If a fire got started in here it could dramatically affect the Wildlands and the Bird Sanctuary. It feels very barren and scrappy. Honestly some of these locations feel like they're the scraps of options in the city and kind of a slap in the face to those who wish to consume publically and remain respectful. Doesn't make as much sense as the 11th Ave site. It's a quiet area off the beaten path, and through a playground zone past many residences. Not much multi-family rentals or apartments out that way that would benefit. More family activity, being near the parks and pathways. Also the fire hazard! Property values will decrease around this area. Have you even considered that? Are you setting our fair city up to be another Amsterdam? People openly injecting drugs, people intoxicated, people ONLY congregating there because they are DRUG ADDICTS. This idea strikes me as flat out crazy. It's far from transit and the shopping district. I can't imagine anyone wanting to go there, unless by bike in nice weather. Also, it's right in front of residences and likely to offend. I also don't want to see any open flame near dry grasslands in summer! Per "DESIGNATED CANNABIS AREA 4.2 (1) Council may by resolution designate areas located on City-owned public places in which cannabis may be smoked, vaped or consumed." City of Calgary does not own Inglewood Wildlands, the land is owned privately on lease to the city. It is secluded and could lead to uncontrolled use of cannabis. Crime, Impaired Driving? It will invite fires and already prohibited bicycling and dog walking in the Wildlands. It is not close to any prohibited use multi-family units and is accessible only by a long walk , bicycle or car. Yes, I live in Alice Bissett Place, due to a car accident. Most of the people who live here suffer from mental illness or a brain injury. Pot parks and people with mental illness who take medication would be a terrible mix, and cause all kinds of problems. It will make our street unsafe. Yes, there are not enough spaces in the city. We should be focusing on identifying areas where we should NOT consumer cannabis, like schools and libraries, not the other way around. It would be more economical and efficient. Children! An elementary school, dry woodland grass which backs onto people’s homes- we don’t need a hugely increased fire hazard, increased traffic and with inebriated drivers,
214/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 garbage and prosperity destruction ( it absolutely will happen), increased crime, and the wildlife it’s designated for?! This is FAR TOO CLOSE to residents and the bird sanctuary and the bike path and the school and and and NO NO NO We already have issues with encampments and people coming to camp, we don't need another spot for those to be. Those who walk dogs or enjoy the area would have to deal with the smells. Wildlands parking lot has had its share of drug deals, sex trade activities and suspicious gatherings of people and cars. And now you want to allow pot smoking. I’m astounded to say the least. Access. The nearest bus stop is blocks away. People will not want to walk and you definitely don't want them driving, consuming cannabis then driving home. Plus there is a whole lot of grass in that area that you easily catch fire from a stray spark... Especially if people cut across the Wildlands. I prefer the other Inglewood location. This spot is hidden, away from transit, only accessible by car (smoke and drive? I don't want to be a cyclist on that road then!) and already there are problems in the parks around it with illicit drug use. Traffic issues Same as area one but not as close to my home. How would the area be policed for vagrancy and potential cases of exposure in cold weather? The Inglewood Bird Sanctuary is a frequent destination for families why would you establish an cannabis consumption station, are you planning on setting up an area to drink beer and distribute snacks here as well? Large group of people, strong smell of weed, people under the influence driving to and from the location no eyes on street, who manages? Who regulates underage use? What do CPS say? WHo pays for maintenance and security ( cannabis is an intoxicant, not a cup of green tea) Is it too far removed from the main foot traffic area to be useful? Public transit is not easy to get to this location. To get there people will be driving, smoking dope and driving. This will just be a heat score for the cops. This is a bad location . increase in traffic to access the area. Smell drifting towards the bird sanctuary building... but really this is land under reclamation that smells so that point is mute! Please see my comments for Proposed Area #1 This is a residential area where families with young children live. If you walk down the sidewalk any time of the day, you will see families and children all around. This is also near the Bird Sanctuary which has day programs for children. Please do not consider this location for pot smoking!! So people will stop at a park, smoke up and then drive off, smart idea Smoking cannabis in public places should only be allowed where tobacco smoking is allowed - children definitely should not be subjected to smoking (it sends the completely wrong
215/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 message after the long campaign to get them to not smoke) or to people half stoned. The residents living on 9th Avenue SE shouldn't be subjected to a public consumption stop across from their homes. House values will decline, crime will increase and children will be witness to more than just people smoking pot!! Many, location doesn’t justify reason for having dedicated areas, is nit accessible, will promote impaired driving, is out of the way to be monitored by both the public and city. No condos in area, out of the, will attract the wrong element. Strongly oppossed. No public transit within 800 meters so people will likely drive. Support for public consumption of cannabis isn't reflected in any other jurisdiction that has already moved to legalization. We need to learn from those ahead of us. This site is very secluded, and will be difficult to monitor. What will stop people from using the whole Wildlands as a cannabis site, not just the parking lot. There is one road in and out of the site, passing by an elementary school. Are we encouraging consumption and then driving? Druggie hangout no no, not that I am aware. I support both prospective locations As an Inglewood resident I have no issues with this location. Do NOT allow any public space consumption It's two block away from an elementary school. A bad idea all around. Also there is a fire concern. parking lot, means driving, means driving while intoxicated. Isolated location. How is it regulated? How does it fit in with mandate of Wldlands Park and Bend in the Bow? Two schools that are on the only route to wildlands parking lot, school groups often there. I have doubts a person would walk that many blocks to have a smoke. There is no bus service to that area in Inglewood. Prevent access by minors. Cannabis consumption should not take place in public areas. When we allow one activity over another at certain areas, those areas then are taken over by said group. The parking lot would be unusable for anybody to into consumption of cannabis. Why would we encourage public cannabis consumption near private homes? Issue 1: Access. The site is remote and not high density housing - the very 'clients' this pilot is meant to accommodate. Will all users walk or will some drive to access the site? Access requires driving through a playground zone. How will the city monitor impaired drivers and protect our children Yes - do you really expect people to drive from all over Calgary to go to a park in the middle of the winter? And then drive stoned home? Do you think the community wants people from all over for this? It should be open like tobacco or alcohol and given the same rules. none, seems ok Since this location is so far out of the way and in a sparsely populated neighbourhood, driving here is almost unavoidable. Does this not cause problems with people leaving the site? No trains, few buses nearby.
216/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Colonel Walker School frequently uses the Inglewood Wildlands as an outdoor learning space. Classes access the park on the NW corner, which is less than 200m from the school. This impacts our ability to use this area. There are also concerns about walking to the bird sanctuary (impaired driving). None, I think that space is under used and out of the way. Kids will see this, I don't think they should. There are homes within site of this area and kids in the neighbourhood. Safety- consumers may be approached by others to buy, borrow or take their supply of cannabis. I'm not in favour of this type of public consumption site. This is a TERRIBLE location: It sits in a residential neighbourhood (kids). It sits next to a ecologically sensitive area (grassfires). It is relatively remote and encourages driving. The ONLY vehicle access to the site is through a playground area. There is already a local encampment issue. Smoke would harm walkers, runners, bike riders, babies in buggies and anyone in a place of many or even few smokers. It would provide drug dealers and youth wanting it to easily find a meet up place... I would question how potential cannabis users would access this location ie by car, by bike, as I do not believe it is likely that they would walk. I have concerns about individuals getting high and then operating a motor vehicle. This is in a residential area (families, dog walkers). It is remote and will encourage other undesirable activities, like illegal drug dealing. It will be taxing on CPS who already is understaffed with personnel and vehicles for patrolling. Why would anyone consider putting a group of drug users together to get high and be a problem for ordinary residents? This is directly across the street from homes. Children live in some of those homes. People using the wild lands have to pass by this area. Two nearby facilities: Colonel Walker School and the Inglewood Bird Sanctuary are frequented by children. No. It's a terrible location. It's close to the wildlands which is a park area the children from Colonel Walker school utilize for field trips on a regular basis. They should not have to walk past a park where people are using drugs. As well how will people get there, driving? It's very from everything. It is not accessible by transit. Would promote driving and consuming marijuana. This poses a huge environmental risk to a protected area Should be confined in the same way alcohol consumption is. It should not be in the public area Yes! Migration patterns to birds habitat near the Bird Santuary beside the area. This area also promotes DRIVING while under the influence. Many visitors, school-aged children and tourists also walk straight past this area and will have ZERO benefit to the Bird Sanctuary and future funding. Yes, how about it now being encouraged to drive past a school in a stoned state. Increased garbage, butts and noise in an area that is for ANIMAL and flora preservation. How will you keep order there? Will there be times the gates are locked? It is very inconvenient for most people to get to. Potential impact to the wildlife at the Wildlands and Inglewood Bird Sanctuary. Fire hazard in a sensitive area. Is this land
217/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Suncor's? will they allow it? This area is out of the way. I am concerned about potential illegal activity. other homes and families in the area -more traffic and how will this be monitored ? Ridiculous! This is an environmentally sensitive area (the wildlands themselves plus the nearby Inglewood Bird Sanctuary), across from residences, and far from public transit. There is also a primary school 2 blocks away with children frequenting the area. Fire Proximity to housing. Westerly winds. Bike path. My home is along 9th avenue between 21 and 22nd street. Winds are primarily from the West Southwest - which means the scent of smoke will be a huge issue. I have no problem with these proposals, but within 100 meters of housing is a ridiculous idea. Yes, families, athletes and nature lovers use this area all the time. Too remote 1. Lack of communication with communities re approval of the idea of pot parks and selection of sites 2. Health air pollution & 2nd hand smoke affecting humans & animals 3. Safety 4. Cost how much to build and maintain 5. Parking & Traffic 6. Liability 7. Effects on the Wildlands veg animals Parks, especially inner-city ones, are often used by families and seniors as a way to get outdoors when living in multi-family/condo environments - do we know the demographics who frequent this park? Concentrating users in a locations that isn't a place people would otherwise go to recreate or shop seems like it's inviting trouble. This location is very isolated. Why are we intentionally concentrating users? I disagree with the concept of consumption site. It's my understanding this location already has issues with homeless camps. Wouldn't this just further ghettoize this area? These designated pot smoking areas are a ridiculous idea! Isolated area - increased opportunity for crime and illicit activity. Close to a nature reserve, away from the public eye. People would likely have to drive there and be driving impaired from the site. More people coming to the area to light up... near the river where families, bikers, walkers want to enjoy the area †¦. Public spaces have no place for pot consumption Do do it!!! GCC has approved stores then smoking areas encouraging too much high risk activity in the community encouraging intoxicated individuals to drive or roam the streets. 1. This is unenforceable. Police do not arrest anyone publicly smoking. Why have a designated area? 2. The area is across the street from my house and I have asthma. Already, I cannot go outside if my neighbors smoke cigarettes, but that is only occasionally. This designation will affect my health.
218/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Having a public consumption area only impacts Calgary's youth in negative ways. This gives young kids easy access to something they don’t need.
Yes. People will be free to consume cannabis in their homes. Why should the rest of us be subjected to their bad habit? This is a slippery slope and will ruin the character of Inglewood.
Why can't people smoke under their own roofs or in their yards? We do not need this and their [sic] are no benefits to having a designated cannabis consumption area.
There is negative impact on the property values in this neighbourhood. It took decades to gentrified [sic] this neighbourhood and it will be destroyed in a couple of months. This is a family neighbour hood. Why Inglewood? We are a family neighbourhood! Was it ever considered what the 'sober fiving' [sic] house and support senters [sic] that deal with people going through will be affected given this in the neighbourhood. Potential for crime to increase. Nobody here wants or needs this type of park. Combined with the moronic safe injection bus this area will be known as a [langauge removed], drug infested dung heap once again.
Consider that the councillor for this ward will NEVER hold office again & will lose his lucrative and cushy job. Nobody wants this and it will ruin Inglewood.
What is the cost to the neighbourhood? Rather than adding a pot park, why don’t you increase the number of police in the neighbourhood so that I don’t have to worry about being rob [sic] or my house being robbed.
This is a family area and we do not want an area for smoking weed. This is completely inapropriate [sic] and will drastically bring down our neighbourhood.
Very small designated area.
3. Do you have any other questions or comments regarding the proposed location?
It is nice to have the option of walking around the bird sanctuary after consuming cannabis Make it bigger Again not a big benefit to cannabis users outside the neighborhood
219/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I feel like this location is a cursory second option and that the first option will go through regardless of public input. Maybe instead the city should look at selling edibles which are less of a public nuisance? Great spot, great idea Will I need a wristband to get in? Is there enough seating for everyone? Will I be able to access this space 24/7 and if so have we considered citizen safety? There are sooo many flaws with this proposed plan. Are you doing this just to make people question if you even know what the hell you're even talking about? If it is used as designated will other activity follow that may disrupt the area and especially residential. Just because it is legal why are we provided designated green space? The same isn't true for alcohol or cigerette users. Fine if it is legal designating space for its use is ridiculous. It would be nice if it was closer to spaces where more people actually spend time. The separation of cannabis sites will encourage reckless consumption and continue to promote negative public opinion of cannabis. This is especially dangerous for medicinal cannabis users, whose social standing will only depreciate despite their need. Don't do it.
Will the city be adding seating? If someone wants to smoke, find a place where others aren't affected by the cancer second hand smoke can cause. I will never be able to use this large green space if this location allows users to smoke here. Move further west? I hope this location is reconsidered and relocated into the more densely populated areas Again this idea seems like a joke. Unsuitable location nothing good will come from having an area where people congregate in public and get high I believe we need consumption sites and this would be a good location. Same comments as above I will not be frequenting any businesses in those neighborhoods now... Why here? why not closer to downtown. Central Memorial Park? This is hypocritical and irresponsible. Neither Alcohol or Cannabis should be permitted Don't do it. No public consumption sites.
Unlike alcohol consumption, smoke is not something that stays in a particular place. How can you designate any public space and not adversely affect non drug users 2 of 4 proposed places are in Inglewood - how come we're so lucky? SARCASM. Let's just restart the media spots about how smarmy our area is. People gathering to party and the smell of canabis should not be a burden to the adjacent residents
220/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Why have a public site in the first place? If people choose to smoke or use marijuana they can do it at home Again I say, [bad data transfer] Let people smoke where they do [bad data transfer] and quit trying to regulate everything. We don't allow public consumption of alcohol. Don't need to provide public space for consumption of cannabis. Legalizing it is one thing, we don't need to encourage it. And certainly don't need to spend public funds or dedicate public spaces to it. Pot is not like alcohol - if I am drinking, it doesn't affect others, but if someone is smoking pot, the fumes drift and DO affect others. Unless these parks are going to have walls and a roof I don't think they are a good idea. The City should not be providing consumption sites. Our tax dollars should be spent on more in-need people and social problems like low-cost housing. Get your heads out of the cannabis haze. Noise? Smoker safety with vehicles? Transportation to and from? Parking? I don’t think it is fair that all four proposed zones are in âœtrendy― locations, yet the mass public is unable to easily access them. Should I really have to take a bus/train for ONE HOUR just to do something LEGAL? I suggest rethinking this strategy you have to have the same for alcohol - you can't have this for one thing and not the other.
Pot should be treated the same as alcohol, not to be consumed in public Smoke at home i like it This is near the bird sanctuary and a protected area! A dog park was not allowed but allow this??? There is families living near here, terrible idea! Why chose this site? How are eating edibles going to be illegal? Will police have power to search or harass anybody eating food in public? THIS IS IRRESPONSIBLE. THE AWFUL SMELL OF SMOKED MARIJUANA WILL NOT BE CONTAINED IN A PARK AND WILL DRIFT TO ALL AREAS AROUND. YOU HAVE NO CONTROL ON WIND DO YOU? Yes if you plan to open up smoking parks why not open parks to buplic drinking it's still a substance WHY should tax payers pay to have parks to encourage people to be stoned in public?? Is this what we really want?? If you have to have them - this one is the dumbest. You’re telling me people will leave their hotel & drive down here to smoke dope? How do they get back to the hotel? I do not support public consumption sites for Cannabis. I believe that consumption should be in private or in licensed establishments. I don’t think we need public spaces for cannabis. I thought that cannabis consumption rules and designated areas had to mirror alcohol consumption rules and designated areas. Since public consumption of alcohol is not permitted in parks why is cannabis being permitted?
221/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Public consumption of alcohol should be used as a trial before public consumption of alcohol. This is the opposite of what I picture when I think of Calgary as a clean, safe,healthy, family friendly city. do a better job getting public feed back . this is a terrible attempt and even with rhis inout youll still [offensive language removed] it up . why not get overall community involvement from as many neighbourhoods in calgary who actually welxome pot . I think the concept of permanently designated areas is a bad one, unless they are in an area where the public can safely and responsibly enjoy cannabis. For example a section of prince’s island park. don't do it, i am opposed to this proposal. Bad idea Calgary's Parks and Rec website which states, "Calgary's parks and pathways - yours to enjoy" will need to have a caveat stating, " .. yours to enjoy only if you are fine with exposing your children to "legalized" pot consumers and the subsequent issues. Why isn't there more consumption sites?? It is ridiculous to have cannabis legalized, but not have anywhere to consume it. why this one? Agree that we need legal consumption sites for all, but not random green spaces that impact neighbors with partying and people potentially driving under the influence after using them. How did you choose this location? Why do you think this is a good idea? If people can smoke weed in parks, why not drink beer? Absolutely terrible rationale on this! This is very nonsensical. What about the potential fire hazard?Who's responsible for drug intoxicated individuals and public disorder?Who will keep my kids, pets & home safe from wandering drug induced users. USE THE MUNICIPALPARK ON SOUTH SIDE OF CITY HALL FOR A CONSUMPTION SITE Why are you so [offensive language removed] stupid.
What type of monitoring or supervision is proposed in these areas? Why are all 4 sites in ward 9??? Why are all the locations in ward 9? Spread them to other neighbourhoods! What about downtown? Belt line? Please do not congregate them primarily in inglewood and other ward 9. Is it just going to be an open field? As I said I will fight this with all I got as I don't want anyone smoking weed near my kids. It's like 20 meters from my house!!! only three communities? Good location why here when 90% of Calgarys population doesn't live here. Why are proposed aite not even distributed based on population density. why has the city got it in for the Ramsay/Inglewood community? Get you head out of your butt [personal information removed]!
222/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Please find alternative locations; this is the only way to access the bird observatory, so it won't be possible to avoid passing by this proposed consumption site This is stupid and offensive, do you permit drinking in public places? Do not go forward with this proposal. Kids and school trips go the bird sanctuary. The homeless camps along the river are already a problem and this proposal to place drug consumption site in the area will exuberate the problem What about the people who live near here? Second hand smoke and exposing youth under 25? As a Calgary citizen I don’t want this liability. The smoking lications should be indoor outside of great neighborhoods, even better if outside of the city similar to some malls. We are trying to revitalize the community and the city keep throwing us [offensive language removed] projects to deal with. New trains, increased road traffic, reduced road access, bridge re-routing, and yrs of constructions to live among. Cut us a break. Gian-Carlo do your job. Winter You are choosing a very quiet area of town enjoyed by nature lovers and frequented by all sorts of city wildlife to instead be littered, vandalised and then just left to be looked after by residents. Totally the wrong place! Have it where it can be police Reasonable location The decisions were supposedly made on it not being close to a school or nature area- it’s close to both of those things! Saying âœby the wildlands― is clue enough that it’s in a nature area. It will stop me, my family & neighbours being able to enjoy it. When are you legalizing alcohol consumption sites?! What have Colorado and Washington states done ? Has the Inglewood Wildlands steering committee been approached regarding this? No. Why not?? Why consistently propose options at conflict with community enhancement? You realize the site is closed to pubic access at night, right?? Nor acceptable. If you are going to allow this sort of thing, why not designated alcohol drinking areas? Parks are public and this restricts the use of others who may not want to have this sort of activity in a public place. Isn’t there a law stating how far liquor stores or cannabis stores can be from schools? This is too close! if you are going to allow consumption of cannabis in this area will you consider allowing drinking as well then? I would hate to see people getting intoxicated in an open area as there would be no control as there is in a bar were people drink. 4 place to smoke stupid need more free range Why is Council making this so complicated? Ths is comparitively unsupervised and may encourage larger gatherings which could be problematic. I do not agree with the proposal When will silly hall host the first TOKE party with my tax dollars
223/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Again I need to ask, why are tax payer funded properties going to support the use of pot? this should be done in paid establishments with no exposure to the public or childern that may be in the area. Cannabis should not be consumed in public areas This entire idea is ridiculous. No public spaces just like we don’t have public alcohol parks. Our society does not need to see public cannabis consumption sites. What about MY rights as a birder and educator to breath fresh clean air while wandering this area teaching children how to care for nature? This is not the place for a cannabis consumption site. We teach our kids say NO to drugs, except in this spot? Why are you allowing public consumption of the intoxicating substance Cannabis, but not alcohol? Find another area. Like west of Balzac or a remote area Too close to tourists, family and others comung to enjoy the bird santuary and wildlands. The community school and school programs use the pathway next to the site for field trips. Already a parking lot with its own issues Are there going to be set hours, or can people just wander in during the evening and night, and into the parkland, disturbing wild life that is nocturnal? Another example of human needs superceding wild life protection. How would this affect the wildlife from the bird sanctuary next door? again, you cannot sit on a bench and drink or smoke and condos/hotels you cannot smoke tobacco so it makes sense that you cannot consume cannibis Making cannabis consumption legal is a terrible idea. Beltline would seem to be the best place to pilot a site -- it has the density and with the amount of condo dwellers, I would imagine has the highest need? Inglewood has some condos, but it's mostly single-family, so not a high need for outdoor sites. locations need to be further away from rail roads major roads, and public places How fast are calgarys bylaw officers? People are going to smoke wherever they please and just walk away from any officers trying to waste their time with this beauracratic Trainwreck of a consumption solution. Totally against this. Tax payers money can be spent else where. should be treated the same as alcohol in public areas public cannabis consumption is a terrible idea, we do not allow public alcohol consumption, why would we allow this?? This would be fine as a secondary location, but would be unsuitable as the only location. It would give the (unpleasant) impression that consumers must be out of sight and removed from the community in this isolated end of the neighbourhood. More locations will be needed i love this location While not exactly in my community, I do frequent the area at times for various reasons and it is JUST PLAIN WRONG !!!! Activity on public land should not be allowed to infringe on enjoyment of the land or surrounding area - this is the basis for many bylaws. Again, don’t be idiots. Nobody wants these. Follow Edmonton’s lead.
224/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Is there public transit (buses) available to transport safely to that location? Why are you trying to control cannabis consumption? I see nothing but a plan to monetize consumption through punishment of use outside of designated areas through ticketing/policing. There should be locations throughout the city including cafes No, there should be some spaces for consumption until cafes or lounges become legal. The remoteness of this site also could lead to increase in other undesirable activities (which the other site would not experience due to higher traffic). I strongly disagree with any consumption sites. Further, consumption on private property should be subject to containment of smoke and odour on that property. Just a dumb idea for many reasons fights robbing party time... we really dont need these public consumption sites. look at allowing condos to allow smoking within a dedignated area on their sites. I think this is a very inappropriate location to even consider and should not be even open to discussion. It may a distance from the school and child care but the children utilize the wild lands and pathways right there. Children first! No Please don't move forward with this site. I would not support any sites in ward 9. For the same reasons I have given.
What fire protections do you have? What if someone leaves the space and goes for a toke in the wildlands? How will you police this? I personally don't mind the smoking in the wildlands if it werent for the fire concerns for this lovely area. Many more are great. Can it be made into a grown-up playground? What are the hours of operation? Terrible idea, so disgusted that this is even being proposed and considered. I have always held the city counselors in high regard until this proposal was suggested. I am very dissappointed Why does there have to be public consumption areas at all? You can't drink alcohol in public, but it must be a licensed or private space.. Why not the same for pot? Do not approve Public consumption rules should be the same as alcohol. Keep illegal to consume cannabis in any form (smoking, vaping, or edibles) in public places. Why contribute to making this area more dangerous than it already is ? Maybe if some thought was put into this to keep it away from residences with children it might help. The idea of having people drive to this location past an elementary school is absolutely idiotic. There is no transit service to this area. Some people using the site will be walking past Colonel Walker school. Nope, its great!
225/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 already many of our dog friendly parks are being whittled away, our golf courses are being built on.. how about making the golf course into dog parks, you could even do a fenced space for smokers, but not downwind of any reasonable recreational or work pl No! What is the rationale for putting it here. This is the dumbest place. Take a portion of Pearce estates park by the fish hatchery instead. This is a private property issue and not a public property issue with a controlled substance. Even a campground you must stay and not leave your campsite if drinking alcohol. Random driving tests by police for intoxication Why two spots in inglewood? Not sure how the locations were selected. No spots in Kensington, bankview, mountroyal etc. Please do not proceed with this decision. We already have problems with undesirable behaviour in the neighbourhood. to relax and smedge of a parking lot is not a solution to hose that don’t have their own yard- an embarrassing example of green space. The public space plan will only work if ALL of Calgary participates. Think of how many Will you install porta potties? Why is ward 9 the only one with sites. [personal information removed] did not consult his employers ( residents of ward9) This is a family neighbourhood, with children frequenting within 10s of metres of this proposed location: not the best location. From the parking lot there entrance into the Inglewood Wildlands is via gate at the south edge of the parking lot, precisely where proposed activity is to take place. Currently there is hole ripped in fence to west side, this is not official entrance. It would be inappropriate to locate a cannibus consumption site with closure hours. Adding lighting would cause negative impact to adjacent Inglewood Bird Sanctuary. Why just pick on older established areas This is a terrible location for a terrible idea. Making a family park a legalized drug zone. Why not move this location to 60 New Street SE? Why pick older established areas only I am concerned with all public consumption sites that are not monitored like a beer garden. We need to keep the area clear of minors. How will they be policed and how often? How to users get to and from the sites? There is an issue of smell. Why do we need to provide public consumption sites just because Gian Carlo has made these suggestions. Other councillors aren't feeling a need to offer up green space in their community. This is the stupidist location you could have chosen. Put the park within 10 minute walking distance of a large concentration of apartment buildings so people can walk there. Not very well thought out location. Dumb idea. Live and let live. It should not be that close to a school or a family use area such as the bird sanctuary. Nor should it be in a park where you are trying to protect the health and safety of wildlife! Consumption of alcohol is prohibited in public areas as it is an intoxicant. Cannabis is also an intoxicant, why is consumption of Cannabis considered to be acceptable when alcohol is not?
226/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
While I hold a neutral opinion about the legalization of marijuana, I am VEHEMENTLY opposed to the idea of a "pot park" anywhere in the city. Public consumption bylaws for marijuana should restrict its use to where tobacco AND alcohol are allowed. Is it indoors and vented? I smell pot on macleod from cars now. Western high kids are now greening out as they move to easy pot sales from buddies or classmates! They still drink Same comments as above. This program could promote a) stones people hanging out near a residential neighbourhood or wandering around until they sober up enough to drive Should be temporary & time limited. Should be reviewed every 3 months. Should expire when edibles & cafes come to the market. Then there will be no need to smoke in public. Why two locations in Inglewood? Why not one in Ramsay? Why did no other Councillors step up? Inglewood is not high density so it doesn't make sense to propose it. How about Vic Park? This is a neighbourhood of a lot of children. We have enough troubles educating our children already. Please don't bring more bad things to us. The number of homeless camps and street persons who are in/ live in this area. If the point of this is to provide people who live in apartments and condos a place to smoke marijuana, shouldn't the designated place be closer to apartment and condo buildings? This seems like a strange place to put this. Please do not proceed with this pilot it is a very bad idea, and extremely poor use of tax dollars. It will be a huge set back to revitalization and creating a safe walking neighbour hood. What is the draw other than an open piece of grass? Wouldn’t people be cold traveling out here to smoke in the middle of winter? Fire danger in a large grassy area is a concern, also when the near vicinity often has rail cars which have contained nasty chemicals. I also worry this will lead to illegal drug dealers and prostitution re-occurring in this dark out of the public eye location, like there was 15 years ago. Yes, Do you realize how big Calgary is?? You are proposing spots in 4 zones.. Do you really think people are going to travel all over the city to get to a permitted smoking zone? There is no way in hell, No one will be able to drive to these places because of the new BS cannabis driving laws. You should contact Suncor regarding their views on having the proposed location so close to their property. [personal information removed] No there should be no public consumption allowed. Just like alcohol this should not be allowed publicly. I do not want my kids to see public consumption of pot or alcohol. Neither is acceptable publicly. I hope the city at least puts some effort into beautifying the space so that it's not just seen or felt as where the 'druggies' go to hang out. Who is the driving force behind this ludicrous plan? Who wants this to go through in this area? Why was this particular area chosen? Who is going to clean up the mess this creates for the entire neighborhood. Who will want to move their families INTO this neighbourhood? Please put the kibosh on this one.
227/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
The Inglewood wildlands does not satisfy the criteria for a cannabis consumption site. The city & P.government need to stay out of the debate as they have no clue, as with the fed's! Why is [personal information removed] offering this to all Calgarian's when he represents only 1/14 of the wards?! This is not a well thought out suggestion. Why would the city build a place like [personal information removed] for the mentally ill and brain injured and then turn around and try to put a "pot park" directly behind it. This location is a very bad choice. [personal information removed] Please reconsider This idea makes me so angry. I bought my place here to enjoy raising a child, not to be part of a beer district and pot smoker party zone. We don’t allow people to drink in parks, why are we treating another mood altering drug any different? What is the motivation behind this project? NO NO NO Why can there not be a designated spot that has proper ventilation so the general public are not exposed? Like a smoking room(s) gathering area. Why subject children and others to this smell when trying to enjoy nature? How would this area be monitored? I understand that is 100m from private residences, but how close is it to the bird sanctuary... where kids go on tours all the time? This designated area is a parking lot. What are the implications for drugged driving? I am opposed No Smoke your weed, eat your brownies, drink your booze- in your home, the bar. Have a bar that allows weed use, where people are together, enjoying food being civilised. Why an isolated parking lot at the end of a road where people will sit in their cars getting stoned, idling their cars, then drive s Could his potentially become a haven for homeless people. Love that it is on land undergoing reclamation from fossil fuel contamination. Please see my comments for Proposed Area #1 This location is surrounded by wildland with grass that could easily catch on fire. It could also be a place that people could easily congregate for parties with alcohol. Public consumption stops shouldn't even be considered in any residential location. My concern is the crime element that could potentially come to the community; Inglewood had to be cleaned up in the 90's and I don't want to go through that again. There is a lot of homeless people living in and around the wild land park area, will this give them a legal place to hang out? These spaces are all open to children - it is agreed that consumption should not be supported where underage have access or be visible to them. See above comments. This is a terrible choice as a consumption site. The dial a dopers will use this as a trafficking site for certain. Find a nice park that has great traffic flow and is easily monitored instead... like Olympic Plaza. The Wildlands and Bird Sanctuary are protected areas- a poor fit
228/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 will this mean that we can expect to see a higher concentration of police in our neighbourhood? It is quite remote and should not be a disturbance to the community. NO NO NO to any consumption in public spaces Keep it in the household like alcohol. What were the criteria used to determine the Wildlands Parking lot? Why is that these consumption sites would never be proposed for Mount Royal? Who would get in their car, drove from Tuscany, to smoke weed in the Wildlands parking lot? WHo does this even serve? What about all the encampments? How about Olympic Plaza. Good Transit access for users, and City Hall can keep an eye on the area to check if things get out of hand. No. Can cannabis be kept illegal? Cannabis users have found ways to consume it for DECADES, just as users of alcohol, and now tobacco, have. Once you've designated areas for cannabis, the city will then be responsible for designating areas for alcohol and tobacco. Consumption of cannabis should be treated the same way as alcohol or cigarette smoke. No public consumption of cannabis. Issue 2: This is an ecologically sensitive area. The plan earmarks the paved parking lot as the designated smoking area. How can you guarantee pot smokers won't go for a leisurely stroll, drop their butts, and start a grass/wildfire. This site is ludicrous - what are you city people smoking? (ha ha) This is just not a central location at all, and maybe that's the point however I'm sure local residents would be disappointed to see throngs of people flock (in cars) to the end of their quiet street to consume. There is one road to the Wildlands, which passes the school. What is the plan to ensure the safety of students as a result of cannabis consumption and increased traffic? Have you considered the proximity to Col. Walker and Piitoayis and the impact (safety, enrollment, access to natural areas) ? None I think its a fine location People walking to or around the park, parking there and driving past to the bird sanctuary, including kids, will see this. I don't think they should. Do I drive to this site in my car and drive home, after I'm not high? Why aren't other city neighbourhoods offering up their green spaces? Will there be resources to patrol and maintain it? How could it possibly benefit the area? This is an AWFUL proposed site and I'm shocked that our Councillor would unilaterally offer it up to the city's pot smokers. Appalling! Do not have public land and spaces set aside anywhere in Calgary for pot smokers. Pot smokers already toke up and haven't needed us to help them find a place. Just because it is legal, why would that change? This area is known for large stretches of natural grasses. Smoking should not be encouraged in this environment for risk of grass fires, particularly with proximity to the rail tracks where flammable materials are transported.
229/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
No I think there should be other ideas that wll benefit your constants that could use your attention. lets hope residents remember this dumb idea at our next election. How are you going to ensure that minors cannot access this area? Public consumption of cannabis should not be considered Iin Inglewood . Cannabis bars are a more appropriate option. Do not see why pot smoking should have special treatment. It should be governed the same way alcohol consumption is Traffic down this dead-end street is already a nuisance, as vehicles do not adhere to the playground zone near Colonel walker school. This area would only promote additional traffic and put children at greater risk with increased, and potential under the influence, vehicles. Let them smoke in their damned backyards, like i have to do with a cigarette. Why do we have to have designated areas for pot, but not for tobacco use? Can i go have a cigarette there, or is that still banned in parks and public places? The wildlands already has issues with homeless camps and illegal activities. I am not sure setting up a cannabis consumption site will help. People will most likely drive to get to this site then consume and likely drive a vehicle under the influence. how will this be monitored ? Who will monitor this ? Citizens who live in this area (myself included) do not want our neighbourhood becoming a destination for cannabis consumption. This is a quiet, residential area. An appropriate site should be more central and in a commercial area. This location is a huge risk for kids. How about somewhere not adjacent to housing. It seems to me you're ignoring the people who have purchased land in these areas. Find some spots in Fish Creek park. Or at the airport. In Inglewood - Pierce Estate park. Often people parked there late at night, early in morning...some are definitely up to something sketchy It’s ridiculous. Don’t put it here Refer Question 2 1. Why were only 3 communities in Ward 9 chosen? 2. Why 2 sites in Inglewood & not 1? 3. What is the likelihood of the chosen sites being used even if the community rejects the proposal & no other community volunteers a site? 4. How many requests have there been for a pot park? Alcohol is not allowed in any public park - why should cannabis?? While I feel that a designated area may have to be considered, I feel public parks are NOT the right location. And if so, who is monitoring these sites for adherence to bylaws and overall safety of everyone exposed/involved?
Let people smoke pot where people are allowed to smoke cigarettes
230/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Terrible idea, all of these sites... hasty suggestion, poorly planned, poorly timed and poorly communicated. Short window for public engagement that will likely mean nothing in the end. Council and the Ward 9 Councillor in particular disregards community input and treats opponents with disdain. Get rid of it Move it somewhere else outside of the community that our counsellor wants to densify. Or maybe move it to the end of his street at the off leash park so his family can be exposed to it first hand. This is beside the bird sanctuary and likely harmful to the birds. School children come to the area on field trips. The handibus is often in the parking lot for the brain-injured rehabilitation facility on 9th, and the handicapped have to breathe the smoke, too. I have nothing against people consuming weed in their own home but it does not need to be in public. Pretty sneaky giving minimal time for input. This is a truly stupid idea and if it goes ahead we will make sure our councillor loses his cushy job. Why does this need to take place in a public environment / space. The needs of a small number of people seem to be overshadwoing the needs of the majority. The park/public space will change the landscape and what make [sic] Inglewood special.
No research was provided as other countries and neighbourhood benefits having these types of parks in the neighbourhoods. [Very] disrespectful that the neighbourhood was not engaged in this proposal. Very little public notice was provided. No other ward in this city volunteered for this stupid idea because the councillors know that they'll never hold public office again. If this proceeds it will ruin the neighbourhood & will be remembered as the beginning of a very bad time. (hate the leading questions BTW)
Don't throw away decades of progress in Inglewood! There are already enough degenerates […] here causing trouble without attracting more from around the city. Pull your heads out of your collective [language removed]. Not enough notice / leading questions
What research was provided to be reviewed? Very little public notice was provided? What is the rush? It took years to clean up Inglewood, and I am concerned what's going to happen to the neighbourhood. Inglewood is already dealing with drug issues from East Village. My concern is where does this end, are we going tohave heorin [sic] parks in my neighbourhood next? Pot has been indicated as a potential gateway drug for people of addiction. Where is the support for them? No other councillor provided support for this. Re-evaluating this councillor and their decision making capabilities. No public notice was provided to the residence [sic], only park signage. Never new disloyal, and shows a complete lack of respect for the neighbourhood. The essence of the neighbourhood will be lost. Good to know that the interests of the neighbourhood and potential development are being ignored. Social economical interests are being ignored. Minimal notice provided. The first question is very leading and shows how little respect the City of Calgary has for the interests of others.
231/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
You can't go have a beer or a glass of wine out in public why can you smoke weed in front of our children. Alcohol designation areas?
OGDEN
(GREEN SPACE LOCATED NORTH OF SHOPPING PLAZA AT GLENMORE TR. AND OGDEN RD S.E.)
1. How would this consumption area be of benefit to you?
It would not. It would not. probably won't be here anyhow so no benefit It's too far from me. What if I don't have a vehicle and my landlord doesn't allow smoking? I don't think it would. Me and the 8,309 residents of Ogden could walk to this location, but what about people who live in a community that doesn't have a designated site? Are they going to drive? Take transit? Have a designated driver? Better to provide areas in all communities it may help keep smokers out of the parks my kids play in No I think it's beneficial to have some outdoor areas for people to consume cannabis. I think having more dedicated parks where it is legal to consume would give people more options, and decrease the chances of people illegally consuming in other parks. It is the closest to me. I can smoke my marijuana after I stop at the dispensary I guess. It would not I don't see any benefit to me; only possibly to guests of the hotel, during summertime. It wouldn't as I do not use cannabis. It would not to me or the community. Zero investment by the City in Ogden, but a cannabis park is now a suddenly a priority. Unless this becomes a Calgary-wide program it should not proceed, not just ward 9. this location is close to my house It won’t. We don’t do drugs. And if we did NEED them for medicine - I wouldn’t be going to a derilect park with junkies to use it!! We’re too scared to go to Olympic Plaza most days. You don’t even deal with that place - and it’s illegal! Nothing you fools. Not everyone lives in those areas. It would not. It would be of no benefit. It would decrease air quality.
232/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It is a great open space away from bothering anyone. No benefit. Already so much marijuana use in neighborhood. We constantly smell it. Doubt that people would travel that distance to consume marijuana. Far from my place It would not. Public consumtion should only be in a business such as a bar type location. The park where children can see it is unacceptable. Put it in Mount Royal if it is so acceptable. NIMBY Ogden community has worked to improve the community and now ? No, too far away. it wouldnt, these consumption areas make zero sense, there are 1.5 million people in this city and your proposal is a measly 4 spaces far away from the majority of residents? it wouldnt benefit me. i live right there. i do my best to keep my grandchildren away from certain things. I would move if this happens in literally my back yard It wouldn't. It wouldn't be a benefit to me for I don't participate in smoking cannabis. it would not This is not beneficial to me ita closeish to my house No Not at all. I think its a very reasonable space! I dont plan on using this drug in the future but this location is a great use of space! No all it would do is ad more homeless and crime to this struggling community It would not, I am able to consume in my own home. No, not for myself as I don't ever plan on using. i would benefit if my neighbors used it as I can't even go out into my own yard as the smell around me is horrendous and it severely affects my asthma! I doubt very much that my neighbors will use thearea It wouldn’t benefit ANYONE. This is the biggest waste of money the city could have come up with. None NO ,bad idea .. public pot smoking area is a place for drug deales to hung out = needles.. and drugs leads to alcohol leading to fighting and crime . plus lots of garbage who going to monitor this to stop childeren form hunging around this spot bad idea. It would not be a benefit to me. In fact I don't think anyone will stand in the middle of a field on a busy road (Ogden) just to consume cannabis. Yes it is in a convenient location this wouldnt benefit me in anyway as i dont go to this area of the city at all. I live in Ogden more policing in neighborhood It would not this would neither benefit nor detract from me
233/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Not at all It wouldn’t no benefit what so ever It won’t. It wont No benefit at all - rather the opposite This idea is NOT a benefit to anyone It wouldn't. There is no benefit to utilizing public spaces for drug use It would not as it is very far out of the way. Walking is an unresoanable expectation. Additionally, driving there from riverbend etc... would prevent myself from returning home in a safe manner. Please reconsider location. It won’t. I will consume at home. It would be of no benefit to me There would be absolutely no benefit to me None - I don’t smoke marijuana It would 0 None. Will people travel to consumption sites instead of quickly sneaking a hit? Stigma remains. Where in the world does this approach already work? NO WHERE. Allow coffee shops. Promote low odour vaping. This is a culture issue. You're wasting money. Yes Zero benefit to me. Yes It wouldnt for me personally but ot would for my wife It wouldn’t Not at all. In fact, I think it would do more harm than good. No It would not in any way. Nice area to relax and enjoy the sun. Stores near by and hotel near. Would be good for tourism. Not at all. It is too far away for me to walk to so I would have to drive. I thought the government didn't want impaired drivers on the roads. It wouldn’t. It is 45 mins away via transit and not near a location that I ever go to for any reason. NOT AT ALL!!!!! WHY in Ogden? It would keep the stench away from my neighbourhood. It would not be of any benefit. No it wouldn't. I do not use cannabis.
234/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Adding health problems No benefit NO BENEFIT AT ALL NUISANCE ONLY It won’t It would hopefully deter people from using park spaces where my children play.
This consumption area would not be a benefit to me. It would negatively impact my life. It has the potential to increase crime. Public consumption should be illegal, just like alcohol. None don't use. no benefit I do not agree in public I do not agree with public consumption. They should follow at minimum the alcohol laws where public consumption at any park is not allowed. It should be go and buy at a facility such as a bar not bring your own where you please. Not at all. Ogden has had so much negativity to overcome over the years - leave us alone. Why should the south east always have to pay - what about the rich communities in the other quadrants of the City. Let us be fair to the Ogden citizens. It would not ! It won't. need something further south. considering the population in the new SE communities with the rapid expansion (i.e. Auburn Bay, Cranston, Mahogany, Walden, Legacy, etc..) Odgen does not make sense. Close to my consumption It wouldn’t. It’s a field. I live in Ogden and there is no way I’d go to that place, and you expect someone to jump on a bus and travel across down. It’s ridiculous. Does not benefit me. Would not use it. Does not provide any benefit and I am against it. Love the safe space. This would not benefit me It would be the closest place for me to the far south to meet and mingle with people It wouldn't. It’s the farthest community from my home that the city of Calgary is considering. And I would like to have cannabis as far away from my little ones as possible! This is the safest community option for my family There are no postives To far of walk from home and back Not, couldn’t be any further away from where I live. I’m positive even though there might be some consumption there it won’t make a dent in the consumption throughout my neighbourhood that exists currently, with consumers lighting up on their own property I'd use it
235/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Could increase foot traffic for nearby business and revitalize the surrounding area. It won’t. What a stupid idea. I do not see any benefit. No benefit None, all of the proposed areas are too far away, and will force people to drive intoxicated. Public consumption sites of marihuana have ZERO benefits to Calgarians in any subdivision within the city. None whatsoever as cannabis should be treated like alcohol and used only in designated licensed establishments. Not in public parks or outdoors unless it is a licensed event and not interrupting the public who choose not to be around open use of cannabis. would not It would not benefit me. It would not No, Has they anticipated the fact that more emergency services may be required at these 'public consumption' sites? No No benefit. Put in an area behind a bottle depot, no lights or benches either. This is no benefit It would not be. There are no benefits to legalized consumption of cannabis. Politicians want to appear "with it" & gain popularity with pot/drug addicts. I wouldn't use it, but it would be nice for people to have a specific place to smoke outdoors. I do not enjoy walking through the smell of cannabis smoke, and this place would keep it out of most people's breathing space. It would NOT. This is a horrible Idea . No benefit what so ever. It is non sensical that the City of Calgary is considering any public consumption sites. The same rules need to be applied for Canabas usage as Liquour usage. Why is this even an item being discussed by the City and Councel. Not in any way. I am the land steward for this site in Recreation. please contact me as there are future development plans for this site. it would be of no benefit would not it wouldn't be a benefit, there should be no public consumption similar to the rules of alcohol use It wouldn’t I think it’s a ridiculous idea for ALL sites! NO benefit It would be of NO benefit This area would provide NO benefit to me or my community.
236/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Disbenefit. No public consumption, ever! Shuld be the same as liquor laws. Public consumption of liquor would have less impact as walking past someone consuming liquor does not expose me or my children to the alcohol the way cannabis smoke does. I would use it regularly It would NOT be a benefit to me. Maybe it would give me a reason to go to Ogden, aside from buying weed No benefit for me as I am not interested in cannabis Absolutely no benefit - leave this area as it is - a quiet greenspace for the nearby residents to enjoy - this idea is absolutley ludicrous It won't Its close to my house so could go there to enjoy time with other consumers. It would not be. I am completely 100% in favour of decriminalizing marijuana use in Canada. But This is a dumb idea No real benefit. Just that I agree with the sentiment that if we don't provide legal spaces for this activity to happen then it will happen elsewhere. Yes It would be great! I think there should be many of these spots all over Calgary. No benefits at all Only having 4 sites for the entire city does not benefit anyone other than those nearby. These sites are in seedy neighourhoods and I will definitely not use them. Having to drive to get to a site is ridiculous. It wouldn't!! it wouldn't. I need a consumption point but all of the proposed are too far. Am I expected to drive to and from intoxicated? because I highly disagree with driving under the influence It wouldn’t It would not benefit the community or individuals in the community. This is close to a sensitive low income area that needs city help not an option to spend money on drugs. Great Neighbourhoods listen to the needs of communities this is not wanted I don't think providing a consumption area for this substance makes any sense. Period. No matter what, there is no benefit to anyone smoking pot. No benefit actually its negative. This is the closest to my residence, but not close to any places that I visit. I'm not sure this location will serve me. It would not benefit me; I believe it would be a detriment; concerns about safety It wouldn't help condo renters....Especially ones taking transit, way too far to go, sketchy addresses. All the locations suck, high potential for robberies, and long response time by police. Its close to my home, within biking distance No benefit at all None whatsoever Provides a space for people to engage, similar to a bar or restaurant.
237/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It wouldn’t benefit me at all but it’s a good trial space for public cannabis consumption. It wouldn't. Too open and exposed to the elements for just a bench and an ashtray, as well having to take a bus there. Maybe I could use an uber. It is of no benefit to me or any public No benefit to the majority of people in this area or other areas Not benefits at all. Not NOt a benefit to the community It would not No benefit. This would become a more unsafe area than it already is. This consumption site would be of no benefit to me. It could have adverse benefits such as unsavoury people. I do not believe fine upstanding citizens would go there. Accessible to pathways/transit avoiding driving under the influence. It would be of zero benefit. It will likely only decrease the already depressed Ogden property value, and encourage crime and public intoxication. Very poor idea. I am for decriminalizing it but encouraging public consumption has zero benefit as far as I No benefit. remove smoking from parks close to my residence I would not visit this site as I have a private residence it is far away from my house. No benefit and would not support this idea. No. Just what we need. A place for our teens to hang out and try to buy or get pot. We all now know smoking is harmful. Cannabis is more harmful and mind altering as well. Let’s not turn this city into a place where drug use is common and public. It would not, I am opposed to this site It wouldn't It will not, this is a terrible idea, for any parks, anywhere! Do not do this, this legalization has doubled my chances of getting injured or killed by an impaired driver! and I have been in 3 car crashes that have involved impaired drivers! Handy It would reduce crime and also keep other drug use off the streets. It would be good as it would keep the smell of cannabis in a safe area for users. A cannabis lounge should be no different than a bar. No benefit. all the proposed sites area joke No benefit to me personally. Not at all. It’s a stupid idea. This would only benefit those within walking distance to utilize this and the other designated cannabis smoking areas Won’t have to smoke in my house 100% of the time
238/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
This consumption site is of no benefit to this society. This is an ad/hoc recreation area for children. It won't. Consumption laws for marijuana should be parallel to current cigarette laws. Marijuana is not alcohol and should be treated differently. has no effect on me but for all the renters we have in this neighbourhood it would be a benefit. It would be of no benefit whatsoever It wouldn't. It wouldn't, I'm not travelling to Ogden to consume weed. It wouldn’t. It would be a detriment. I disagree with public space being used for marijuana use. No benefit to me, what about the children that normally play in this area. Will there be large fences surrounding the park to keep underage users out, will there be more frequent checks for legal blood level prior to users leaving the site It wouldn't. I dont think items fair to the public to have only 3 consumption areas. I live no where near any of these. Then I'm expected to wait 4 hours before going home ?! It would not. What a terrible idea to have "consumption" spots. Why not send the drug addicts to where they should be in the safe consumption spots already set up for drug users. Why concentrate drug users in a bad area of town already with a terrible reputation. Bad idea. No benefit whatsoever This area would not benefit me in any way. The smell make me nauseous not to mention the health effects of second hand smoke. I feel this would bring more problems than good to the area. The area has been used as a sledding hill for years by families, not so much if changed to this. It would benefit no one This would allow a safe and open area to consume as opposed to being regulated to my residence. it wouldn't No, this consumption area is not of benefit to me. No there should be no public consumption allowed. Just like alcohol this should not be allowed publicly. I do not want my kids to see public consumption of pot or alcohol. Neither is acceptable publicly. NO BENEFIT at all to me This consumption area would not be beneficial to me. I live in the deep south and take transit. This consumption area is very out of the way, and does not benefit myself as I am not willing to travel a hour just to use cannabis. Alcohol has bars, why don't we have lounges for cannabis? Would not as I believe it should be †œIn― your home for smoking. Medical cannibis is available in other firms than smoking. In fact there will be many alternative methods to smoking. No one should have to choose between polluted fresh air or hibernation in your home. It won’t! As a member of the community I find it disgusting that we need to have a consumption site in our community. What’s next a consumption site for alcohol. All this does in provide a location for under age kids to potentially buy it illegally.
239/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Not at all!! Absolutely not and no benefit to anyone Just like thousands of other ,I won't change and will continue to use cannabis everywhere! Of course as always ,safely and not around children or in non tobacco areas. It would provide people in general with a south area they can smoke. Which is pathetic. One zone for the entire south? Are you mental?
I'll continue to use my MEDICINE anywhere I Damn well please. Thank you. It is no benifit No benefit ...I can see the benefit of medical use but I do not agree with recreational use. I detest the smell and do not want to have to deal with it even more than I have had to while it was illegal. My neighbors have been smoking illegally for years and I hate it not looking forward to more Not at all. I don't have an issue with designating legal consumption sites but the selection of those sites must make some logical sense. Just because a site meets a certain criteria does not make it a suitable site. It must be appropriate for its intended purpose. It will not benefit me. It would not. Leave public green spaces for family's Only consumption area in the south which is close to home. I don't consume cannabis but I support the end of prohibition and the rights of all Calgarians and visitors to consume a legal substance if they chose to even if they do not own a home in Calgary. This is one of the most ridiculous ideas of the City of Calgary. How could they in their right mind allow only one councillor propose a site, and in this case 4 sites in his Ward. How did the councillor choose the 4 out of his 17 communities - simply unacceptable. I see no benefits for me. This would be of no benefit to me. I am opposed to providing public areas for these activities. It would be a detriment because I would not take young children there in the winter to toboggan if it were to be designated a consumption area. It would not. It is unreasonable to limit legal cannabis in public spaces. If people are not allowed to use it in a rental or condo, how can you expect citizens to travel to one of four parks? You want people driving stoned? Treat it the same as tobacco or alcohol. Only rich home owners are allowe This is a preposterous decision. Like telling folks they can drink 5 miles east of the city in a field, then expecting then to drive home. No one will use these. It would not. It would give me a safe place to consume cannabis if my condo building banned it Good proximity to Hotel and SE inner city. No benefit. Do not smoke or plan to smoke in the future. Not at all. It would be detrimental....as a property owner nearby, I HATE the thought of mass consumption of an odourous substance that gives me a headache when I smell I whiff of it. Let pot smokers go far away from human occupancy.
240/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 it wouldn't be of benefit to anybody of no benefit to me or my family. Do not want it in my neighbourhood. not at all, stupid idea This consumption area would be benefitial [sic] to me, because it would make the surrounding areas softer, & more family friendly
This consumption site will alleviate my lack of access to a permissable place to consume cannabis once it is legal.
2. Are there any issues we should consider with this proposed location?
If the red dot is the exact area where this is proposed it could not be in a worse place for children. This is at the top of a heavily used snowy area with a child friendly hill for sledding and tobogganing. Should never be considered for this location. Yes. This is an open park like area used by families & children to walk dogs, play and use snow sleds. We already have a problem with drinks and druggies in Ogden. Now they will.all gather here to do more then smoke pot nope Is there any seating space? Ogden is an up and coming family neighborhood where we are trying to keep public intoxication off our streets and out of the community. There is a bit of a problem with it here. My dear would be that it creates a gathering place for this type of behaviour You may wish to consider providing portapotties, particularly if people are coming from other communities and can't get home quickly. its a steep hill... you may want to move it into the flat area This is not a tourist attraction area or a walkable spot in the community, citizens will drive to this location for consumption. How will you guide them to make a right choice and not drive home? Is there even a bench? This park looks a little bare. I don't see much draw for people to go to this location. Having an area to sit or something to do (even a basketball hoop) would create more appeal. It is very out of the way and people will likely continue to consume discretely in (illegal) public places over traveling to this location. It’s small, and there’s nothing to attract people, this isn’t worth the trouble. Is it very transit accessible? You guys should put like a cafe or something that would entice people to purposely go there. A green space isn’t exactly where people want to go. Like come on. Only 4 locations for the size of our city is not realistic. Also, how will people outside of the community get to and from this location?
241/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
The proposed location is in the middle of a steep hill that is commonly used by children for tobogganing. Steep hill, children playing, future lacrosse facility (I think). Some gopher holes (trip hazards). Too many people congregating could be bad. Calling this site a 'green space' is an insult to the residents of Ogden. Zero infrastructure at this site. Is an empty field that the City has ignored until present. Location makes zero sense. All it will do is take away needed community green space. Ya. Kids from school can walk there. And it’s weird. Who NEEDS to get high? In a public park. Can’t drink there so can’t smoke up there. It’s going to be a [offensive language removed]show and disasterous mess. People will camp out! All hours. Not everyone can drive or take transit. Come one and use your heads. There are people like me who have severe allergies to smoke and would be unable to visit any park where public consumption of cannabis is allowed. Taxpayers should not have to pay for cleanup and those that do litter should be subjected to stiff fines. The area has been used for families to play, toboggan in the winter. The grass would have to be cut and waste bins installed. Would rather see the land used for something that benefits families in our community. Lacrosse centre, Rec centre, etc. This site has a history of homeless alcohol abuse please do not add cannabis. How will police monitor public intoxication. They have failed to do so in the padt dispite the public asking for more supervision. The homes and businesses will suffer losses. Yes, it's a fairly abandoned space with no buildings fronting on to it. Probably not an ideal location if you want to curb youth abuse of marijuana. Yes, do away with these locations entirely and let us consume anywhere smoking is allowed yes---children, pets, traffic. Ogden already has issues with crime, do we really want to make it a focal point of intoxication? Plus the smell would be awful. We have enough crime and peddlers in the area. This probably will bring in more of those which we do not need we are family community. I don't understand why we need to have a place where people can go to smoke cannabis in public. Diving under the influence It is 500 meters from my home. I have small children and I also host international students. In most other countries marijuana is illegal so it will make my guest very uncomfortable. My yard/home will smell of marijuana. 8024 25 St Se is where I live I am concerned that each of the locations are close to the proposed green line. As a resident of Ogden who is not in favour of the cannabis legalization, I am concerned for community safety. I don't feel there should be an area where people can consume cannabis - cannabis should be treated the same as alcohol. It should only be consumed in enclosed controlled areas. no parking near by ie you wouldnt build a bar without a parking lot. tons of industrial traffic. not a safe place for individuals after dark. isolated from other services Driving after consuming
242/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
The buisnesses around the location as well as the cash connection sight right across the street... Many issues we are very crime ridden and haveing a very hard time controlling this and vandalism there are way to many homeless people and hard up people please do not ad this to a community that’s beautiful and already needs enough work. Are people going to drive to a field to stand and smoke Cannabis? Where would people park? Is there not a concern that people will consume and then drive? I am the General manager of the Glenmore Inn, located just south of the area I THINK you are proposing. The red dot on the map is the side of a hill. As the primary business in this area and a major stakeholder with regards to this decision, more info. Will it have proper ventilation? Proper signage. Ways to keep minors out? What safety measures are being taken to the rest of us? It’s access, are people from all over south Calgary supposed to drive here in order to legally smoke, then what? They can’t drive, the park is near NOTHING and is only near one of the least busy and most grungy malls. I’d rather try my luck on the street That nobody is going to go to one of four parks in the city, they are just going to light up on the curb children, smell, garbage, eye sore, crime, first thing you see entering neighborhood, dry feild leading to fire. It's the middle of nowhere. Lighting and seating area. no It’s sketchy at night, maybe put up lights and stuff more homeless drug addicts in the neighborhood This is the location of a very popular tobogganing site with many children on winter weekends store owners may be upset at park users taking up parking spaces Proximity to railroad yard and tracks Access to it, for one thing. What about the heavy equipment and construction trailers currently on site? why is it ok to smoke to get high in a public space but not ok to drink in a public place Safety. People getting high and driving. additional locations Will my tax dollars be used to maintain the park and pick up the [offensive language removed] that the weed smokers leave? It is extremely hypocritical and irresponsible to permit Cannabis use in any of these proposed locations. Do you have any idea what these locations will look, smell and function like? Ridiculous!!! Families with children and pets use the parks. They should not be inflicted with drug use in public places. It makes the site unusable to families and those who don't use this drug
243/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It is located near vagrant filled neighborhoods, there is a safety concern regarding location. It is very inaccessable by foot/transit. Places an unreasonable burden on those looking to consume cannabis in a lawful manner. Smoking cannabis smells. And people gathering to party and the smell of canabis should not be a burden to the adjacent residents You are choosing a site in the Ogden community which already has sufficient challenges and is predominately lower income. The community has worked hard at improving the area and does not need further challenges. An open invitation to loitering. Daycare Centre in plaza directly next to proposed location The city should not be designating public land for this purpose Yes, it needs to be everywhere. No one wants the stigma. What happens when it is minus 30C? Look outside our borders for what works. Amsterdam coffeeshops. Low odour vaping and tech. Trash. Having garbage cash must be a must It's a silly location. Is it good or bad that it's in view of a busy road? No lots of seating This is a waste of time which would be better spent on more important issue such as affordable housing and repair of infrastructure. The amount of houses in the area with kids. No None really. Except that living near any of these proposed sites would have me fearing for perhaps not my life, but most certainly my safety. I also would not walk a child of mine near these sites. Low income housing near by. Might collect wrong crowd if not monitored. If this green space is suitable then why are there not more green spaces suitable? How about the dog park on the esat side of the Lake Bonavista Driven loop? Accessibility to calgarians. Who is this spot serving? Why this spot? It seems these 4 zones have not been thought with Calgarians in mind. Sure, what stops anyone else from drug use in that area as well? I think our EMS and CPS are already working hard enough in this area. Prevailing wind, will the stinking smoke drift back to the shopping mall? This is a family neighborhood. Justify why special places to consume cannabis even need to be provided. Access to minors. Any green space used by children and animals should not be considered!! You just have to acknowledge the irresponsible disposal of cigarette butts to see that cannabis paraphernalia will be carelessly left strewn about!! Not safe for kids and pets!!!!!! Not doing it, impared is impaired and not iin public Yes. Don’t do it. Smoke at home.
244/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Police have enough to do and should not have to monitor any drug parks. Alcohol is not aloud so why should drugs. Hospitals have smoking areas that cannot be monitored why would you consider drug parks. DON'T CONSIDER THIS AREA OR ANY OTHER My concern is the total lack of spaces. How are the spaces going to be managed? What is the plan to keep people safe in the winter? How will alcohol consumption be curtailed? Make it comfortable enough someone would want to go there to consume. No issues with the actual location. How can the aroma from smoking or vaping Cannabis be prevented from escaping the location. Second-hand smoke has been shown to be harmful to health. There is no supervision, there is no one responsible for safe consumption, this is a dangerous idea. If children still do sledding on that hill in winter. As we did as children. that is a favourite toboggan hill as the north face holds the snow longer than any other ice.... Yes, any public place can expose under age children. Let’s think about promoting an effective society and not one that puts children in harms way. Yes, why Ogden. It had to deal with the Bike Gang in the past and over the years contamination issues as well as having overall lower income families. Why put temptation close to the ends of people with limited income. People driving there, consuming products as they will, then driving home. Exposure from the toxins is also an issue with proposed canibus cafes etc... remember second hand smoke? Transportation. While on some bus routes LRT won't be available for years, leading to consumers having to travel via their own vehicles. There are also a number of homeless people that can be seen on a regular basis in this area. Not necessarily any issues other then location. Why Ogden? is the purpose of Ogden to serve the population in the deep south? if so, simply look at the population per community and make it somewhere that serves us. say 130th ave, Cranston, fish creek. Nil Yes, it’s a field and it’s in the sketchiest part of the community. There is enough druggies wandering Ogden already. We have enough social problems in this low income area do we really need to add to the problem. Why not in a nicer area?? Ogden already has a bad reputation for being a dangerous and sketchy neighborhood. We're hoping this will change and I think a designated smoking site will only steer this in the opposite direction. We want to clean the rep of this great community. This green space is located by a residential area where there are children. It is also located by a daycare. It may cause a lot of people the need to travel. All the locations are very centrally located. Its too small, having a social area to smoke can only benefit the community. How would people get here? Drive? That's like promoting getting high and driving. Cash cow waiting to happen. How on earth would the poor residents living by feel as well? Crime and increased drug trafficking in the area. Traveling to this site from across the city Make sure children do not have access to the designated cannabis area in the community.
245/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I dont support any location. Weather , shelter and ground conditions It’s an empty piece of land in the poorest section of Ogden, steep hill on one side. This is a ridiculous location Maybe needs some benches and garbage cans Large parking lot near the area might encourage people to drive to the area to consume cannabis and then drive off under the influence. Consuming and then driving. Yes, distance to residents and families with kids. Do not think Calgary’s climate makes this a sensible plan. You have to allow pot friendly bars and restaurants, surely! Can we not be civilized about this? How about some areas in the NW such as Bowness? The majority of individuals using these proposed sites would travel by vehicle and would be impaired when they left the sites. There are many other issues with these proposed sites, including the requirement for extra police enforcement at these sites. Smoking in public around children and those with chronic diseases will negaticely effect the neighbourhood. You can’t drink alcohol outside, why can you get high? Also people likely to drive to and from this location, risking impaired drivers People and their activities should not be put into a comprising position in having to deal with cannabis use. this is a low income area and you are giving children the opportunity to consume cannabis as you have no one to police the area without it costing the people. is that that the only drug that will be used I think you are creating a situation where people using drugs will congregate with not oversite. At least in a bar you have staff who can watch to see if patrons become unruly and call the police or kick them out. This option doesn't exist in a park. No, great location Cannabis should not be be allowed to be consumed in public areas This area is near a busy road in Calgary, people consuming cannabis could potentially drive under the influence and pose a threat to motorists in the city of Calgary. This entire idea is ridiculous. No public spaces just like we don’t have public alcohol parks. No lights, no benches, no trash containers, no washrooms. Please stop this! Why do we want to promote public drug use for children to see. Cannabis smoke spreads a long way from point of use and is extremely potent and an irritant to many. Any outdoor use is inappropriate. Public consumption of cannabis should be illegal and the law should be enforced. Any exposure to smoking, whether cigarettes, pot or anything else (smoke from fire pits, wildfires, etc.) is detrimental to human health. Why promote them? Could it concentrate the unhealthy pastimes of drinking and smoking? It's already a hangout for people who've visited the bottle depot+spent proceeds on liquor. These people are nice, but have nothing to do but drink. A bad influence on young smokers?
246/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Imapired drived after it is consumed on these sites. Might as well have a park where you could Drink in Public then drive home Very BAD idea resoureces needed, impossible to police, you continually implement without thinking of the enforcement Consumption should be restricted to the user's private property, not on public property. Jennifer Duggan, Recreation, Superintendent Sport & Partnership 403 875 4944 naming 3 locations for the entire city renders them focal points. this should be no different than alcohol and that it should only be consumed or allowed to be consumed subject to the same alcohol rules and laws. will this gather the homeless population already in our area? Does that mean they get to have a beer there too? Dumb idea keep the pot legaslation the same as alcohol not in public places. There are several houses and businesses nearby. Children use this hill for tobagganing and riding bikes down Yes, it’s high crime and most probably smoke weed on this area anyways. Why do this!? would promote under the influence driving Many children play at this green space public cannabis consumption is a terrible idea, we do not allow public alcohol consumption, why would we allow this?? Yes, many. This is a high traffic road. I worry about the hazard of people crossing or mental health and being under an influence and people throwing themselves in front of cars as a suicide attempt. Stoned people walking across and along the roads as there is no one there to ensure they don't over-indulge. That is real effective thinking in considering public safety! Kids live in that neighbourhood and will be exposed to intoxicated people roaming! I think this location is perfect People will drive to this location, get stoned & then drive while under the influence. This is dangerous & against the law. Under age people will get access through unscrupulous cannabis smokers. Yeah, it’s in Ogden yes - This space is across from a Calgary Housing Complex with a large population of children. This space is used by these children as play space (tobogan, field sports etc. Through TIMN and Green Line Engagement sessions this sace was identified as key Traffic, crime, homeless camps, garbage, medical emergencies (OD's), destruction to nearby properties, human waste, needles, bottles, fires, panhandling, intimidation of nearby residents There should be multiple locations as well as cafes
I assume the grass would have to be mowed more often. It doesn't look overly pedestrian friendly in terms of long grass and level ground. Don't get me wrong, I'm still supportive of this as a good location compared to the alternatives. There’s a hotel right beside the area. Consumption areas should NOT be in public spaces at all! This will only invite more negative behaviour and stigma to the area. Property values will decrease.
247/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Its in a community that doesn't feel safe. There are risks of getting jumped or mugged in these areas. Designating a specific area can decrease property value for surrounding areas as well. YES! There is a daycare centre located in the same plaza as the Glenmore Inn. This location is too close to where the kids spend their days and play. Children should not have to be exposed to this while playing outside or coming into or out of daycare! it wouldn't. I need a consumption point but all of the proposed are too far. Am I expected to drive to and from intoxicated? because I highly disagree with driving under the influence Ogden is full of gangs and theres gonna be idiots bear macing each other and things like that on the daily if drug users end up hanging out there How would increased traffic be dealt with, city transport (as smokers should not be driving), parking lots (for designated drivers), and bathrooms. Where would people who currently use the area for non marijuana use be able to go to account for lost space Community had issues in the past with this site used as a dumping ground, camp with old furniture, drug use hangout. The City Police/paid security/MOCA worked with the Glenmore Square and GI over an 18 month period to cleanup the issues lets not start. I assume people could be driving to this area. So then you have the issue of driving under the influence problem Yes, the children in these areas. Large groups of drugged up people is sure to be a safety problem and a health issue. Impact to rentals and homeowners in the area. I feel it will be negative. Especially for families. There is very little infrastructure so I hope that the City will put some in place There are already alot of vagrants around this area and it is not well patroled. I dont believe putting in a consumption area at this location would benifit any of the neighboring businesses. Proximity to roadway; impairment; safety issues All the locations are potential slum areas. If you want the renters to be accommodated without having to drive across town, then they should be placed in high density rental areas. eg. Bankview, Mission, Capitol Hill, Killarney, around the Beltline, etcet None that I can see If you search around there are so many families with small children meaning not good to be close to drugged people. Should be zero public consumption locations Potential for it to become a breeding ground for illegal activities, such as other drug use and dealing. There is no landscaping at all for windbreak, aesthetics and ambience. if you could only drink a glass of wine in this area would you want to spend time consuming it here. There is nothing nice about this site. Pot smoking and consumption although legal should not be encouraged let alone promoted. Treat it like alcohol and smoking. Too close to property, is not needed Alergic persons like me cannot stand the odor from cannabis, we suffer headaches, even migranes. Yes the people who don't want it.
248/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Generally opposed to this type of use of space Why should people be allowed to smoke pot in public and become intoxicated, but they cannot consume alcohol on public land. This area is used by children now. There are many questionable characters in the neighbourhood and the proposal would attract many more. This is completely unreasonable and frankly laughable to expect every cannabis user in a city like calgary to congregate in only THREE areas. i am willing to bet you be unable to enforce this whatsoever. This proposed location is essentially an open field that has foot traffic all ready through it. Mostly to get to the strip mall. This proposed location would become uncomfortable for many for walking by there. No. As regards to open space and accessibility as well as distance from residential it's an ideal location. Can see. My [removed] won’t be getting my vote again if this is approved. Terrible idea. Please cancel this. Marijuana does not need the safe consumption site like opioids do. No benefit for people’s health. We don't allow alcohol or smoking cigarettes consumption parks. So why allow cannabis. Major liability issues for the city as how does one get back home. Please have common sense and allow nothing. Keep a park a park for everyone to enjoy. people using this park would have to commute, possibly by motorized vehicle there should not be any consumption sites Yes, this is already a high risk area with existing security/safety concerns, crime, gangs. Many residents close by already have their own private homes that they can smoke in. Not sure why its needed here. none Who would go to this place and comsume in an open field? there are restaurants that I would imagine they do not want to smell cannibis neither would their customers. Yes, why do we need designated spots. Alcohol isn’t allowed to be consumed in the street. Neither should cannabis and smoking/vaping are restricted locations. Do the same. Why do we feel we need to offer something special for cannabis? Nearby low income housing and an empty legion. We are actively trying to clean up our neighborhood, not make it trashier People would drive here. To close to major roadways, where anyone who uses could drive onto a road, while stoned and kill someone because they are stoned. This is a terrible idea, for any park, anywhere! Bad, bad, bad idea! Not at all impressed that we are even thinking of this! No Just proper ventilation Please see comments below. all the proposed sites area joke This mall in general is DODGY with a †œmassage parlour― next to the MP’s office, next to day care. I visit the other businesses, but avoid. Is still close to family housing, visible across the park. Children also use the hill for sledding in the winter.
249/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
It’s on a hill. Its near a day care. Only access would be by taxi or bus for people far away so costly. With regards to my answer above, any person(s) outside a walkable distance will need transportation. Depending on bus routes and service times this might be very hard to plan. I think this will cause people to drive to these destinations and then drive. No There families who use this area. yes, it's a nasty field. lets fill it with vagrant pot smokers, it worked well in east hastings. because it is far from everything, the potential for using and driving may increase. Yes. It is being proposed in an area that already has some issues with disorderly behavior. It is far too close to residential areas, and since many will have to drive to the location, traffic and parking and noise could become issues. All proposed sites seem to be clustered in one area If you don't let people drink or smoke in public, then why would you let people smoke pot in public. Cannabis should be consumed in private areas only. No need to promote something not healthy for the lungs to younger generations. Too close to a Major Hotel. Majority of residences are for low income (Calgary Housing) and S.E. Calgary community Resource Center is one block away. The area was designated for Youth Lacrosse a few years ago. My last concern is for area Parking - not enough Parking now for area Residences. Bus routes, washrooms Or do you want us [offensive language removed] in the open? Forcing a PUBLIC space to be designated preferentially for certain citizens who decide to engage in smoking marijuana. I see this as similar to having certain parks designated for heterosexuals [bad data transfer] in certain areas. See above, since it will now have the same ramifications of drinking in public, should it not be a contained building with a filtration system to handle the legal number of users allowed in the area? Yes. Make it consumable everywhere. Make it like alcohol. Because I would much rather enjoy it on my back porch than drive 25 minutes and have to wait around for 4hours afterwards.. it's not fair. It should be treated at though it was alcohol. Like it or not for how terrible this location is, there are children that live around this area. You are dooming them to a life a crime and drugs even more by putting pot smoking millennials in a field of [removed]. Making them feel like they are trash by the train tracks which they are not. This area will become a gang / drug selling / hangout area for criminal activity. Police do not have enough funding from the city to monitor it. Personally do not want this in area in my opinion asking for trouble similar to problems Colarado is having. A lot of young families in the area do not need children exposed to it. HATE this proposal for any area, what about the rights of people who disagree with smoking weed. How do people get there without driving to such a location?? No - great location.
250/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 close to C-train We don't allow alcohol to be used outdoors all over. cannabis should be treated like alcohol. Used in designated indoor establishments & your own home. The rail way tracks are very close by. No there should be no public consumption allowed. Just like alcohol this should not be allowed publicly. I do not want my kids to see public consumption of pot or alcohol. Neither is acceptable publicly. AFTER they are completely intoxicated, how do you propose they leave the area? By City Bus? By walking through the neighborhood? By driving vehicles? EACH of these suggestions means Transit and Transit drivers and passengers will be affected, neighbourhood families will be too, as will Police. I am not a resident of Ogden but this is the closest consumption area to my place of residence. I Feel more areas need to be opened up outside of the four, alternatively allowing cannabis consumption publicly would solve this issue. Children use this area especially in winter for sledding. That in itself should suffice. Yes. The area has attempted to clean its reputation up for years and this is a major set back. It will be a spot for homeless people to gather as individuals in the community who already choose to take part in consumption will continue to do so in their homes. Crime, Impaired driving! Will this be bear the new c train? If it's bear the spot I wouldn't be thrilled having my kids wait for train next to this area. How will people get there without a dui? What will we do there? It's going to be a stupid trap that police will watch around to give out easy fines for FALSE tests of too much THC levels consumed! That you only have three places, and it appears you are trying to shove cannabis users into old neglected areas. Pathetic! Yes this community will eventually have a train line and the last thing yhis community needs is ppl from the downtown area polluting a community that has been working hard already to clean this area up my parents and sister still live here and they dont wsnt this! bathrooms We don't allow people to congregate and drink in large unsupervised groups on public property I can't image this is a good idea for pot smokers ...they may not get as aggressive as people using alcohol but what are the chances they will not drive away after smoking up and becoming impaired Yes - the precise location appears to be on the south side of an open unmaintained field. This is not a park but rather an undeveloped field. Access would be difficult having walk across an unmowed field or down an escarpment particularly in winter weather conditions. Why are they in one ward, I am concerned that if there is significant push back it might be reduced to one and then the choice might only be Ogden given the social/economical make up of this community. These sites are not required. I don't want it in this community. It's a stupid idea Access to Kids, Parking
251/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
No access for minors Firstly, area has been identified for future sport area as per the draft ARP with a lacrosse site as a possibility. Second, why would people want to travel to such a present isolate site to smoke up and as not easy to access how easy will it be for the police to patrol. Police $ more stretched. This will increase traffic and drive business away from the nearby restaurants. Yes. It is a toboggan hill in the winter. It is designated as a lacrosse site to be developed. There is a bus stop in this area and children are present. Providing this public area encourages the use of cannabis. I have seen people here walking their dogs. It is a natural space. Yes - it should be open and legal everywhere in the city not just squashed in just a couple of locations. Do you actually think people will go there in the middle of the winter in the middle of the night? Do you want people driving stoned? Does ANYONE actually think this was a good idea? Consider that people have been smoking cannabis for years without designated spots and I bet you can't name one time you have been affected by it , excluding perhaps a concert or festival setting. Not accessible unless by car so this accentuates the impaired driving issue since it is located adjacent to Glenmore Trail. None, looks underused I live in houses beside the park I feel this might cause issues with my children that live and play nearby.
Parking is always tight in the neighbourhood and being that there is no parking regulations/passes in our community that may cause issue with incoming people who come. Borders on industrial area, dirty dusty. Difficult to get to if you are walking or using public transit. Potential fire hazard especially during drought conditions. People driving under the influence. The affect the the smell drifting to nearby houses, causing headaches and illness form the stench. Decreasing property values. no designated pot smoking areas are necessary; just let people smoke pot where they smoke cigarettes. Make this into an off-leash area instead! More trash, more work for city. Tax dollars to pay for clean up.
Parking, party all night, trouble 1) Is it dog friendly? 2) Will it be safe to smoke pot without fear of the police?
Shelter
252/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
3. Do you have any other questions or comments regarding the proposed location?
No. If we are to treat this much like alcohol then no public place should be included. We would never allow a group of people to come to this place to consume alcohol. Rediculous. We are trying to clean up this area not reverse. This is a step back weird spot. who will be here generally? Regular visits by law enforcement. Choose sites that are in higher income areas. How do any of the proposed locations serve visitors to the City who visit our downtown? What will stop people from having too much or sharing with minors? How will this site be monitored for public security and safety? Just as noted above. 4 Designated fenced in areas of max 10x10m feels like a joke, that wouldn’t compel anyone to abide by the new bylaws. Maybe it quiets the not-in-my-backyard crew. Some park benches, trees, and a parking loop for food trucks would go a long way. I love that it’s being legalized but when it comes to alcohol there’s bars to consume. But smokers get a green space.... what the hell. Did anyone even visit the site or just Maps it? There's an old adage that says the map isn't the ground. City of Calgary may wish to take that to heart. Is there a lacrosse facility planned here? Is it near places where cannabis smoking will be prohibited indoors? Besides the Glenmore Inn. What were the criteria used to select sites. Will there be any public meetings. Why is the councilor allowed to select sites with zero public consultation. How much will this cost? Ogden sees the local library close, yet a cannabis park is a priority? Great location, great idea How will the city monitor and enforce Public Intoxication? We don’t want to inhale your toxic crap spewing out. Keep that crap boxed in. You can’t smoke where you want....don’t care. How about stop messing with the people who can't make to those spots. Let us smoke in public parks. If you don't you will lose a lot of peoples vote next election. No It seems the city is choosing to put Cannabis Consumption sites in neighbourhoods already facing challenges. These are the areas the city should be using. Great location here. Don't want it. Please find a use for the land that benefits our community as a whole. Want something that promotes a healthy lifestyle and freedom from addictions. Will the police be monitoring to make sure it is only pot that is being used? How does designating this (or other) sites impact use (both present and future) in the park. Eg. will prevent a playground or sportsfield from being added to the park. This is not addressed in the proposal and is being ignored. Want to see this answered. Scrap it entirely and let us consume wherever smoking is allowed or allow for cannabis cafes If i cant drink in public or smoke a cigarette iin a public place, they can smoke pot there eithen
253/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I'm generally against the concept of designated outdoor cannabis areas near homes of people who don't want to have to deal with it. I don't think it is fair we don't get a decision in our neighborhood in regards to this green space being used. We just have to live what the city decides, we pay our taxes? very shortsighted, will the city also propose open drinking sites Please don’t do this to is This area will be become an eyesore to the area and city. location should be have shelters and be more accesible for those in the ne Will citizens be allowed to consume another legally available recreational substance (alcohol) at this site. More police.don’t ad to the problems here This area is used by children in the winter for sledding down the hill. This is also a "have not" area. I would have serious concerns that illegal activities will begin here. Just legalize cannabis cafes and stop this insanity. As we own the adjacent parking lot, I WILL NOT PERMIT any persons parking in my lot for the purpose of cannibas smoking. I need to know exactly the spot you are proposing. The red dot is on the side of a hill. If there is such a location, will it be closely monitored by police? If there is such a location can I call the cops when my neighbor lights up in his backyard or shed and the smoke fills my back yard and I am unable to open my house windows ever?? Cigarettes smell WAY worse, why not make every cigarette smoker drive to Ogden in order to legally smoke. This is ridiculous that you are actually proposing this as a site. Did you guys drive by this location? It’s a big hill why should my home value drop because pot heads hunging around making neighbor unsafe for children. It really is a silly concept. Renters will just go to their backyard to consume. It's a waste of money and resources on coming up with sites such as these. Looking forward to the installation. with more homeless drug addicts in the neighborhood, will create more criminal activity I think this site will work well - other than the lack of parking available Do not understand the purpose of designated sites. What is the point? Laws should be enacted to protect renters as well as landlords. This idea is beyond ludicrous. You expect people to get in their cars in January and drive to an empty field to have a smoke? Get real, people. this area will cause people to drive to the area to smoke up and then when finished, will drive away high after smoking pot--the stench will be disgusting in the area particularly at the glenmore inn The city should be reducing the amount of stores where these are available and the advertising on city corners targeting our youth There should be NO cannabis smoking allowed in public spaces. How can the City of Calgary possibly say yes it is ok to use Cannabis here, and no, you cannot use alcohol here! People should not be permitted to use Cannabis in public spaces and places. Please don't do this!
254/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Parks belong to the people - not just a few who want to use drugs in public. If drinking isn't allowed, why should cannibas be? Unlike alcohol consumption, smoke is not something that stays in a particular place. How can you designate any public space and not adversely affect non drug users What kind of safety measures are there, what is to happen in the winter time, will there by spots to sit or will it be a open field? Smoking cannabis smells. And people gathering to party and the smell of canabis should not be a burden to the adjacent residents I disagree with having public consumption sites in any residential area and cannot see any benefit to the community or city I do not see any part of this survey that would let me state that I am completely & utterly against public consumption sites. I am against this proposal 100%. I sure wouldn't want to live nearby. We don't need these locations. will there be time limits Let people smoke where they do now, wherever that may be. Who wants a crowd of smokers gathering in one spot. If we as a society are going to open up public areas for consumption of cannabis, it is only appropriate we make the areas open for alcohol and smoking tobacco. These are adult only products that can be limited by landlords and hotels too. Glad it’s not in my neighbourhood. Ive lived in ogden for 35 years. Im in support of this site location. My only concern is the crowd it might attract being close to so many low income housing units (crack heads). If monitored and used properly i fully support the idea. How can the City of Calgary think that people will only consume at 4 public places. There are not enough police to enforce this silly bylaw. This is not an appropriate response to legalization of cannabis. I urge the city of Calgary to rethink the 4 zones and consider making smoking and consuming cannabis to be legal at minimum where smoking cigarets is allowed. Don’t be Hippocrates. Do children not use this area in the winter to sleigh? Whoever proposed this site is way off their rockers. Why not in Eagle Ridge, Bayview? Does Odgen not pay enough in taxes and is considered too poor a district and to heck with us? Should be conditional, changed easily if objections are raised. Having pot parks will increase drug trafficking. If we have pot parks why not start drinking alcohol in public? Where do you plan to locate the public beer consumption parks? Why would you consider creating cannabis consumption sites? We don't have public areas that are alcohol consumption sites. This is just a bad idea it is discrimination to not allow legal access to low income people to consume a legal substance so public consumption areas are necessary. Health and crime with the general public All locations: smoke at home. Why do drug users have more rights than non-drug users.
255/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
In my opinion. There shouldn’t be proposed locations. You can’t drink in a city park you shouldn’t be able to smoke cannibus. THIS IS IRRESPONSIBLE. THE AWFUL SMELL OF SMOKED MARIJUANA WILL NOT BE CONTAINED IN A PARK AND WILL DRIFT TO ALL AREAS AROUND. YOU HAVE NO CONTROL ON WIND DO YOU? IS THE PERSON RUNNING THIS PROPOSAL ALREADY UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF MARIJUANA? how will safety be monitored in the areas? How will 3 spaces for an entire city be managed? It doesn’t make sense. Will there be a festival style set-up? What is the expected attendance and times? How accessible is the space & transient appeal? How will the risk of fire be dealt with? What does the plan include in terms of setup beyond a bench and a garbage? Will the ground of the area be gravel or concrete We don’t need public spaces for cannabis. Why are we supporting increasing air pollution through public consumption of Cannabis? Why is this allowed but alcohol is not? To close to general public and shopping areas. Councillor [personal information removed] we expect you to represent us at the City level. How could you end up with the 4 proposed sites in your ward. Simply ridiculous. Be FAIR and spread the sites in 4 equal quadrants of the City. I don't think we should do this. People should consume these products at home, not driving to a park. Putting people at risk. This area, and the area across from it, had been reviewed as a possible soccer field location. This would be a much better use of this area. why Ogden? industrial area, and beside a bottle depot. area is already seedy enough. make it somewhere further south. Nil These proposals are absolutely ridiculous. Do you really think that a person is going to get on a bus, ride across town stand in a field and get high. You people are clearly already higher than any of us. Ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous. How will these people get there? Driving and then driving home? Ogden road has a lot of cut threw traffic now they will be under the influence??? I am strongly opposed. Especially with that area being largely renter dominant, I don't wan't to drive by teenagers smoking in various forms with my kids everyday. It's a very high traffic road as well. This is not something that would benefit the people of this community How was this site chosen. It seems like a some what random area to me. Smoking weed has been done in basements and the corner of parks for years. This doesn't provide positive change for the community. Make a large area, a park maybe, where people can smoke and be social. How will you prevent underage youth from getting into these open locations? Why not other areas closer to downtown and not an area that is try to turn around ? Why so little spaces ? There are more than 3 communities that have cannabis consumers
256/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
I think it’s all absurd, really. But there is nothing I can do about this decision. I’m one person. But, let’s try and protect our children from being exposed! I can see this how situation going south quickly for children with parents smoking, with access Please don't waste ant more time or money on this project Shelters ? I’m sure it’s the smell that puts people off the most, how about open up public consumption to vaping and edibles only. Modern form of consumption along with modernized legalization laws More sites would be a good idea Just in general it seems like there should be more locations to encourage people walking to these spots instead of driving. Legal liability is something he citizens of Calgary are not interested in. Second hand smoke and exposing youth under 25 to it? No thanks!! The city requires a more detailed organized program to deal with the effects of cannabis approval. How about other areas in the City, not just SE and NE this seems like the best of the options being proposed I propose that the city designates [personal information removed] back yard as a consumption site since he is the only one who desires these sites. So much for his "Great Neighbourhoods" platform! Why only the three neighbourhoods there are over 1 million people in this city. Reasonable location Please leave it inside Bars, like alcohol This idea should be squashed for all public areas as what is done for alcohol. if drinking is allowed in bars and home then maybe consider cannabis to be allowed on the exterior of the bars as then we know there are no children to be influenced and then it would be a choice for adults to go in or not. If these locations have been designed for tourists and people living in apartments I suggest you put them downtown where tourists and many apartment dwellers woudl actually be. This seems like an out of the way spot near a lower income neighbourhood. Cannabis should not be allowed to be consumed in public areas If the city of calgary pemits the use of public consumption sites, are the considering the risks that this may bring more explicit drug use into these communities posing a threat to residences. This entire idea is ridiculous. No public spaces just like we don’t have public alcohol parks. Why can't marajuana be consumed in areas that are the same as alcohol and cigarettes? Please stop this! Public consumption of cannabis in any neighbourhood will cause problems to addicts as well as the residents of the neighbourhood. Was this space going to be used for a kids lacrosse club? Maybe not ideal bedfellows, and a real shame if this kind of "healthy" sports project gets left by the wayside as a result of further degeneration of the area.
257/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
The City should not be wasting Tax Payers Money on this Give your heads a shake. if you are treating it the same as alcohol and tobacco then do that, no special benches, there are valid reasons you cannot smoke tobacco or consume marijuana in shared places sucha as condos and hotels Odgen is a lower income area already challenged in many ways. Mount Royal would not be considered and Calgarian's living across the City deserve the same levels of respect, care and services. Legalization of cannabis consumption is a bad idea to start with. confining it to only 3 locations, and I find the chaice of the three to be concerning, is unfair to those communities. either public places be designated in ALL communities or none and comply with the rules and laws that apply to liquor. Just to reiterate same as alcohol not in public places. This proposed place is frequented by many pedestrians including youths as a walk through area. There is a well worn path and has been that way for many years. Again, why do this in ANY area? We don’t provide parks for people to drink alcohol in, it’s the same idea....dumb! should be treated the same as public consumption of alcohol It is a joke to think that only cannabis will be the only type of drug consumed at these "consumption sites:. How will you have the manpower to police these sites? Cannabis legalization is terrible and this is just worsening the issues that will unfold. Bridgeland and Inglewood and further along in their re-vamp. Ogden is just starting and still have a bad reputation. I would hold off on Ogden for something like this for a few more years. Liquor laws have licensed bars and restaurants to consume and to ensure people do not overindulge. Implement licensed smoking lounges where people can go and not expose anyone that doesn't want to be exposed to the effects of a narcotic drug. Alcohol is not allowed to be consumed in public, outdoors, except for some festivals/Stampede. People should smoke cannabis in their own backyards/property. VERY much against this idea!! Add a 7-Eleven nearby for munchies Why was this location choosen. It appears previous enegement was not listen to as this space would not have been choosen Why is [personal information removed] allowed to once again force his wishes upon the HUGE majority of Calgarians who are non pot smokers ? There should be more There are a dozen parks in this area and many more across the city that need playground, picnic and other family facilities installed or improved before this idea is implemented I'd just want to ensure it doesn't turn into a night time hub where it's uninviting for casual cannabis users. You know, the Hollywoodified inner city slum with burn barrels and other congregating for less than honourable purposes. I have faith it won't Will the area be fenced off? Will you need ID to provr youre over age? Please reconsider public consumption and look into using the same laws as cigarettes. This will have the least effect on home values, wont require people feeling unsafe by going to designated sites.
258/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 it wouldn't. I need a consumption point but all of the proposed are too far. Am I expected to drive to and from intoxicated? because I highly disagree with driving under the influence I strongly disagree with any consumption sites. Further, consumption on private property should be subject to containment of smoke and odour on that property. Everybody smokes weed at home or just when out and about. This isnt heroin where you need safe injection sites. People arent gonna drive all the way there just to smoke their weed. They smoke their weed all day. If anything a weed bar might be interesting Residential areas adjacent may lose resale value with a designated marijuana consumption site adjacent. Also the potential to bring a †œrougher crowd― to the area is a concern. This site is proposed to be a community recreation site for the soccer/lacrosse leagues. These folks have been working with the city for a couple of years and are just working on funding . Also this location is located to a major safety hazard GL CP rai I would hate to live in any areas in Calgary that have these pot smoking sites. If cigarette smoking is deemed harmful, why isn't marihuana smoking reported as harmful too. Politicians should do their research on what has happened in Colorado. Why the three areas? Bridgeland, Inglewood and Ogden???? Why arent you targeting other areas??? Please provide appropriate lighting to ensure safety and proper access to cross Ogden to take the bus south (or come from the north) Glad it's not in my neighborhood!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Back to the drawing board. Rethink locations...... Addicts are dangerous to the the normal people Should be zero public consumption locations This extremely blank slate of land needs help. Not at all an attractive location for public cannabis consumption. Add some trees, shrubs and the proposed general equipment to make it actually useful. I think city council can do way better coming up with a solution for where to smoke pot. It seems to say you are second class loser citizen's and you do not deserve anything better than piece of undeveloped land. This idea will generate another cost/tax burden with no positive effect or benefit. Not in support of the idea. Keep illegal to consume cannabis in any form (smoking, vaping, or edibles) in public places. Yes it's not a good idea scrap it. How us it going to be policed and making sure no illegal activities going on. This is nuts. A stupid idea! Why is this needed. Smoking is almost impossible in public anymore. Drinking in public and public intoxication is illegal. So why the hell should we as a society promote someone smoking pot and becoming stoned in public? Don’t use this space for this proposal We do not have public alcohol consumption sites so why start with cannabis? I think this idea of public cannabis consumptions sites is ludicrous. Will it be monitored and/or maintained? Will there be lighting for safety?
259/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Cancel this. This is a private property issue and not a public property issue. Please do not pander to a minority. Why was this location chosen as an option? Why are the purposed sites only in ward 9? For years we have been trying to shake off a negitive imagine that this is not a positive step in the right direction even if it will become legal. I do not support this propsal. This goes for all theee proposed locations and any other public site offering- why? Do we offer alcohol consumption parks? Geez get real. It’s legal, smoke it at home! Big area and next to a hotel. Tourists can use here. This is a terrible idea, driving to a park to get stoned, then drive back home? Seriously which idiot thought of this imbacilic idea? This is a terrible idea, for any park, anywhere. I will sue the city if I get hurt from a person coming from this park! Maybe consider a safe injection site with the cannabis lounge as it would provide that extra harm reduction factor and public safety. While I hold a neutral opinion about the legalization of marijuana, I am VEHEMENTLY opposed to the idea of a "pot park" anywhere in the city. Public consumption bylaws for marijuana should restrict its use to where tobacco AND alcohol are allowed. all the proposed sites area joke It will get used. Rather remote though. A second location may be required. Closer to Boardwalk apartments but then families live there & there are playgrounds. What about near Ogden Road & Milican Road, by the CN Raul bridge? Let people smoke as same as cigarettes locations to smoke idiots. I hope council will reconcider where people can smoke marajuana and move towards and utilize the by law of where you can smoke cigarettes and make it the same as with smoking marijuana. Who was the idiot who proposed this area? Stupid laws are stupid laws. I support these sites, as I support the legalization of cannabis. Since there are sites proposed in only one ward, most will have to drive there. The fact that people will have to drive home after consuming cannabis, it is very concerning that these people will be on our roads and in many cases, driving past homes and schools. I think this is a [offensive language removed] stupid idea. Bare field in the middle of nowhere. The field is full of gopher holes & uneven ground. Terrible for people with mobility issues. So you [offensive language removed want us to drive there, get high & then wait there for a few hours before we drive home. WTF are you [offensive language removed] smokin? Whose half-baked idea is this? Will you also provide outdoor parks for the consumption of alcohol? Open some weed bars, it's the obvious solution, this has got to be one of the silliest ideas I've ever heard of. No, keep marijuana use in the confines of that individuals home. I don’t want their decisions forced on me. This is similar to asking for designated public parks to be for drinking. Silly. If pot smokers can consume in open areas, will these same areas be allowing consumption of beer, without having to get a permit? Equal and just consideration for others must be
260/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018 weighed, I don't smoke or drink beer, so can I now drink my scotch in these areas without being prosecuted There should be zero consumption sites in this city. Let them smoke their crap in their own home and that's it. The rest of the city doesn't want to smell that crap, it will make me avoid that area even more than I do already. Hey lets throw some money at it too to revitalize the area! Bad idea!!! Completely against it. Who is going to be responsible for keeping area clean? Thought this was designate for LRT. Who is going to monitor for illegal activity? Our police are already overworked. What about my rights as someone who hates the smell or gets nausea at the smell? This will not stop people from smoking it in Public. As they already do Great move by the City. nasty locations. why not pick the land for the park-like atmosphere (sarcasm) No there should be no public consumption allowed. Just like alcohol this should not be allowed publicly. I do not want my kids to see public consumption of pot or alcohol. Neither is acceptable publicly. Why are you making ANY proposals for ANY public location to be used for people to become PUBLICLY intoxicated? What is the benefit to the City of Calgary for this proposal? NOTHING positive has been indicated yet!! Why is cannabis being regarded as an illegal substance still regardless of the fact that is becoming legal? Everyone is entitled to smoke free environment. Smoke knows no boundaries. Smoke †œin― your home. If you are not home and not taking public transit, odds are you are driving. I hope they really reconsider make any consumption sites the idea is a terrible and not beneficial to the community. Will home owners be given tax breaks as it drives the property values down. The city needs to get thier heads out the proverbial A** on this file!! It’s a waste of tax money We will ALWAYS continue to use where we please and will continue to purchase where affordable and NOT the bunk government garbage! Theres also a playground just north of the so called smoking area in Ogden that will easily have smoke blowing to it when wind is blowing from south, but the industrial You need more Put it in one if your new communitys not all the old communities u alway propose these things in older communities like they have nothing else to compeate with give this area something good - why disnt we get the lacrosse centre or the something more child friendly Who is going to regulate behavior? Who is going to make sure people don't drive away from these sites completely impaired? The proposed one for Ogden is very, very close to residential. Who is going to keep our people safe? People in this neighborhood are bad enough for running stop signs alread
261/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
Yes - the site is designated for the development of an indoor recreation facility [lacrosse] which is currently in the planning stages. Will a cannibus consumption designation block the development of the lacrosse facility. Also the escarpment is used as a toboggan hill. No location is necessary, this is a waste of council's time Bad idea overall why do people need a designated space to smoke pot in public. they should use in their own homes. You can not walk around with alcohol in public so why pot. How are you going to keep children and teens out of the area? Garbage left around personal information removed]promotes Great Communities and community consultation - how did he get away with giving away Ogden space without community consultation. Simply inacceptable. Need to retract his offer of giving up our community as guinea pigs. No need as cannabis lounges are soon to appear. There should be no public consumption areas for cannabis. Be patient. Cannabis bars will happen if it proves to be lucrative. Let the entreprenures provide solutions to this supposed problem. It should not be the city's responsibility. This process is completely flawed. There are no citizens who are going to think it is a good idea to send all of the citizens to four parks to smoke a legal substance. Please advocate with the provincial government to change the rules. This is not enforceable. Treat it like alcohol or tobacco. Rethink this idiocy. Why is this an option. The proposed area(s) should be centrally located or near the river for easy consumption. None, I support this location How are you going to regulate the use to people?
Is anybody welcome to enter the park? "Green space" appears to be a shipping container storage lot. I do not think a public cannabis consumption site is good idea anywhere in the city. There are liabilities that I am not sure the city should or wants to take on. As per above, the thought of condoning public consumption of a legal, but noxious substance is abhorrent! I get headaches from the slightest whiff of pot. I’m very concerned about it becoming legal and if might mean I have to sell my house if neighbours smoke...never mind encouraging mass smoking! Why have these designated areas? Stupid idea! I doubt people will use them. Just let pot smokers smoke wherever cigarette smokers are allowed to light up. This is a poor working class neighbourhood. People are going to smoke pot, and can't afford to feed their kids. Have to use food bank. We have to get rid of [personal information removed]. He's a [language removed].
Why not have drinking so we can have one big party?
262/263 Designated Cannabis Consumption Areas – All Locations What We Heard Report October 2018
263/263